The practice of partnership: collaboration and community

Kate Thomas,

University of the West of England, England.

Setting the scene

Picture a small meeting room in a university building. Six people are discussing how best to involve vocational learners in further education colleges (FECs) in the development of new progression routes into higher education (HE). The discussion is informed, vibrant and occasionally heated. Ideas are suggested, explored and discarded until the group settle on a strategy which they think will capture learners’ voices most effectively. They allocate responsibilities, arranging to work in a way that shares and develops individual skills. A schedule is scribbled up on the whiteboard and changes agreed; notes are taken for email circulation and a date for a review meeting set. The mood relaxes, tea is made, there is banter and laughter. One member of the group takes another aside to plan a forthcoming meeting with a local community learning organisation; others discuss their experiences of a recent conference on Foundation Degrees.

Nothing unusual here, you might think, simply colleagues working together. Look more closely and there is more to this scenario. Each member of the group is employed by a different higher education institution (HEI) within the same region and works as a Progression Coordinator for a Lifelong Learning Network (LLN), of which their HEI is a partner member. Their combined professional experience includes curriculum development and delivery, work-based learning, educational development, programme and partnership management and student support, advice and guidance in both the FE and HE sectors. They also bring to the table personal experiences of part-time study, distance learning and non-traditional routes into education. They began work as a team three months ago.

My initial interest in writing this paper arose from reading the following:

'legitimate peripheral participation can be a position at the articulation of related communities…it can itself be a source of power or powerlessness in affording or preventing articulation and interchange among communities of practice'

(Lave and Wenger 1991, p.36)

I am one of those Progression Co-ordinators and this quote had a particular resonance for me. ‘A position at the articulation of related communities’ seemed to perfectly describe the situation in which I and my colleagues found ourselves in September 2006. We were new players in a complex web of policy and practice relating to adult (vocational) learners. We belonged to the LLN and to our – very different - host institutions. We were working alongside widening participation practitioners and organisations locally, regionally and nationally; interacting with learners, admissions staff, academics, FECs, employers…the list goes on. At the same time, we had been thrown together as a team which had to learn quickly and develop working practices to perform effectively within a complex landscape.

The aim of this paper therefore, is to present the LLN Progression Coordinator team as an example of the 'practice' of partnership in adult learning; to identify the mechanics of partnership as practised by this group and to explore the implications for their LLN of the way in which they are interacting with other individuals, groups and networks in the field of adult learning. It will draw on Lave and Wenger’s model of situated learning (1991) which proposes that learning involves a process of engagement in a community of practice, to investigate the ways in which this newly-formed group is developing relationships and capability in pursuit of a joint enterprise.

The qualitative research for this paper was carried out in semi-structured interviews with individual Progression Coordinators in April 2007 at which point Progression Coordinators had been in post for just over six months. Interviews were taped and transcribed and excerpts are quoted in this paper. All contributions have been anonymised.

Lifelong Learning Networks

Lifelong Learning Networks[1] became part of the lifelong learning landscape when, in 2004, they were established by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) with a remit to improve progression for vocational learners through HE and FE partnerships and to 'locate progression strategy within a commitment to lifelong learning' (HEFCE 2004). The publication of the Further Education White Paper: Raising Skills, Improving Life Chances (DfES 2006) and the Leitch Review of Skills:Prosperity for all in the global economy - world class skills (2006) has done much to raise the profile of vocational learners and added to the relevance and urgency of the LLNs’ agenda. Most LLNs are regionally based, but a number of national networks including the National Arts Lifelong Learning Network have also been established. The organisational structures of each LLN differ, but all emphasise partnership as a central principle in creating and improving opportunities for vocational learners within higher education, including the development of new curricula. The Progression Coordinator team in question work alongside subject specialists and report to a small, centrally-based management and administrative team.

Communities of practice

Wenger (1998) states that a community of practice is defined through its joint enterprise, the way it functions and the capability or shared repertoire members develop over time ‘Most communities of practice do not have a name and do not issue membership cards.’ (ibid p.7). Nevertheless, he proposes that they are everywhere and we all belong to a number of them. In some groups we are core members, in others we are more at the margins. When individuals join communities of practice they learn at the periphery. As their competence increases they move towards ‘full participation’ (Lave and Wenger 1991, p36). The concept of legitimate peripheral participation offers a way of capturing the dynamic relationship between newcomers and old timers within groups, over time. Lave and Wenger used various historical forms of apprenticeship to explore their theory but developed the concept of legitimate peripheral participation to imply ‘an encompassing process of being active participants in the practices of social communities and constructing identities in relation to these communities’ (Smith 2003). Legitimate peripheral participation is therefore about knowledge and identity and this is learning, in the sense of a comprehensive understanding involving the whole person, rather than receiving bodies of facts. Learning occurs within the relationships between the members of a community of practice. It is situated in practice but is much more than learning by doing; it is part of social practice. This shifts the process of learning from individual to social and the process can be empowering or disempowering depending on the community of practice (see Fuller et al (2005) for a critique of legitimate peripheral participation as a means of understanding workplace learning).

The concept of community of practice seemed a useful ‘thinking tool’ (Wenger 1998, p7) to explore issues of partnership, learning and power within the work of the Progression Coordinators. Which communities of practice have they joined? How are they learning to be Progression Coordinators? How are they collaborating with each other, across institutions, across a region, across agendas in adult learning? What are the critical factors of and challenges to their practice of partnership? Does the positioning of the Progression Coordinators’ role and the way in which it is being developed in practice, offer potential for innovative partnerships in adult learning?

Purpose and identity

The overall aim of the LLN is to broaden access to vocational higher education for all ages (Western Vocational Lifelong Learning Network 2006). Progression Coordinators are working alongside LLN colleagues in order to, as summarised by one interviewee, A: 'evaluate current provision and progression routes for vocational learners and to facilitate new progression routes'. B adds: 'finding out what…some of the barriers might be and how we can best intervene'. Both the overarching aim of the LLN and the way this translates into specific objectives provide the team with a joint enterprise 'characteristic of practice as a source of community coherence…it is defined by the participants in the very process of pursuing it.' (Wenger 1998, p77).

On taking up the role, Progression Coordinators immediately became players in a web of interconnecting interests and organisations in adult learning. These included the core LLN organisation, its partner institutions, fourteen regional FECs; local training providers; networks of local, regional and national widening participation practitioners including Aimhigher[2], other LLNs and professional interest groups. The list is growing as new initiatives such as the Higher Level Skills Pathfinder Project[3] come into operation. These multiple communities of practice with related enterprises make up ‘constellations of interconnected practices’ (ibid p.127).

We are working in a context where there are so many different agendas…part of the role is to negotiate all the different agendas…and to try and find something that can add value. It’s quite tricky…a challenge because it feels uncertain…potentially creative – but messy. (B)

If the complexity of this engagement with policy and practice is a key feature of the role, what also makes it distinctive is the Progression Coordinator's double or shared identity: simultaneously a member of the LLN and an employee of a partner HEI. Interviewees were aware that this placed them in an unusual position:

I think it’s quite unique…to bring people together in this way… we’re all based in different locations…but we work together as a team. I would say we're a bridge between the different institutions …maybe that's the most important aspect of our role? (C)

This double identity has advantages: 'It opens the door to so many people in the region' (A). 'We can set our own boundaries to a certain extent…they're negotiable' (C); and disadvantages. D says: 'we can become isolated if those at our own institutions are suspicious of us’. C agrees: 'if they're anti projects such as the LLN…they won't be very helpful because they see you as an outsider.'

Learning partnership

The strongest influences on the Progression Coordinators in the early stages were their LLN line management and that of their host institution. The Progression Coordinators’ ‘apprenticeship’ has been most visibly managed by the LLN and their host HEI, through induction, probation and team-building procedures. D described his experiences as a newcomer:

'initially listening to what we were told and trying to fit this into what I knew of HE …somewhat passively trying to absorb information…from this point we read around the subject, doing some research and looking at things from a more institutional point of view. Working out how the institution and the network sit alongside each other.'

Simultaneous peripheral participation in two different communities of practice has proved to be something of a balancing act. Diplomacy is a key skill which needed to be quickly learned and put into practice:

B: because you’re working for two institutions you have to be more diplomatic than if you were just working for a university…

A: we’re also working alongside organizations…that have quite a similar remit…you have be extremely sensitive around those boundaries.

B identifies the challenge associated with interpreting the requirements and boundaries of a newly-created role: ‘quite often when you go into a new job it's an existing role…whereas…I don't really have a sense that I've got a role to learn, I feel like I'm feeling my way with it.'

I asked my colleagues to describe the other ways they had gained an understanding of their role. They emphasised the role of interaction with others within and outside the LLN and their individual institutions: 'a process of time, and going to things and speaking to people…to find out how the objectives of the LLN can be relevant to my institution…' (A); 'meetings, information feedback from managers, meeting Admissions Tutors and …local colleges to find out what’s happening.’ (C). The range of influences on their professional development was wide, with the authenticity of their sources felt to be crucial:

In terms of knowledge, I'd say it's through…going out to colleges and finding out what's there, talking to learners…you can guess what the immediate barriers are but you need to talk to learners to check you're on the right track and to find out if there are any barriers you've missed. (C)

One colleague felt strongly that specific areas of factual knowledge were required in order to build effective relationships; others viewed the process of building relationships with key contacts as a way of gaining enough of that knowledge to function:

B I think you need…to know the NQF (National Qualifications Framework)[4] inside out.

EI wouldn’t say I do.

A I feel like I don’t need to know about those qualifications in detail…I need to have some kind of understanding, but the people who really know those qualifications inside out are the level 3 tutors…

B I think you need that…it gives you credibility.

E I would say that’s stuff I’ve been picking up along the way and I still have a huge amount to learn.

They also identified the significance of learning from each other: ‘Working with the other Progression Coordinators with different backgrounds has developed my knowledge significantly.’ (B) ‘Through liaison with other Coordinators I think we’ve developed the role a lot.’ (C). Individuals had not, after all, come to the role as blank slates: 'equally important is what the worker brings to the community from outside' (Fuller et al 2005, p.66).

Overall there is a sense of an ongoing dynamic learning process through active participation in multiple communities of practice. New knowledge, understanding and ways of interacting are shared and developed amongst the group and by them, with existing members of their new communities. This implies a more equal exchange of learning among new and old community members than Lave and Wenger suggest. Over time a professional identity is emerging which may itself be at the centre of a new community of practice. This possibility is supported by the value placed on interaction with practitioners in other LLNs. A refers to her attendance at an LLN national forum:

it did feel motivating to be with other people who are doing the same thing…I felt instantly I was learning things from that group because they were engaging in the same things…it was reassuring that they were coming up with the same things that we’re saying

The mechanics of partnership

I asked my colleagues to identify the ways in which the team was working together. How does it function? What are the challenges to its mutual engagement? What resources is it developing which support its functions and identity?

We take our lead from management meetings and…carry out our day to day work in our own institution, on email and by phone, a lot of comments, minutes of meetings, reports from conferences. We share our expertise, our knowledge, then meet up every few weeks to discuss where we are, what we’ve learned, what we’re doing, how we’re getting on…it's key that we communicate effectively. (C)

The words 'sophisticated' and 'exceptional' were used to describe the level of communication skills required to collaborate not only with a wide range of contacts and audiences, but simply with each other across a wide geographical area. 'I think we're very good at keeping everyone informed of what's happening…'(A) Working at a distance from each other was actually seen as a benefit:

Some people would see the (geographical) distance between us as a drawback, however I think it enables you to go away and consider ideas and think about what you’d like to do and how you’d like to do it, before and after meetings. I think it’s quite unique how well we work together as a team. Maybe that is due to the distance and if we were in one room it wouldn’t work quite so well. (C)

Wenger (1998) argues that learning and geography are intimately intertwined: ‘the landscape of practice is an emergent structure in which learning constantly creates localities that reconfigure the geography’. A constant flow and exchange of information and resources facilitates this partnership, is evidence and product of it. This results in a shared repertoire of tools both formal and informal: project strategy documents, a contacts database, minutes of meetings – and a collective sense of humour about the challenges of the role. Wenger argues that: 'mutual engagement involves not only our competence but also the competence of others' (ibid p.75). Where competence is overlapping: ‘it is more important to know how to give and receive help than to try and know everything yourself’ (ibid). The LLN management and the representatives of what are, after all, competing institutions within the same region, must be credited for setting up a culture of collaboration in pursuit of common objectives. In practice this is underpinned by two crucial factors; firstly a shared philosophy: 'I think that's something we all bring to the project, that we don't want it just to be lip service, we actually do believe in something that's meaningful.’ (A). Secondly, an acknowledgement and valuing of diversity:

We've all come from different backgrounds and…everybody recognises that…I think we're aware of our own strengths and weaknesses as a group…of how we can work together and what we can achieve. (C)