Design/Methodology/approach: The paper uses a mixed methods approach: a questionnaire submitted to the Community of Practice participants on their experiences, observation of interaction between Community of Practice participants and data on the use of the ICT platform.
Findings: The ICT supported Community of Practice approach appears to improve knowledge sharing between researchers and advisors, and also draws in other actors of the broader Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System in which the AKS is embedded. However, ICT based tools alone are not sufficient and need to be complemented with face-to-face (non-virtual) interactions. A clear theoretical implication of this study is that this is an iterative process in which virtual and non-virtual interaction mutually reinforce each other: ICT interaction spurs real life and face-to-face interaction, and ICT supports follow-up on real life face-to-face interaction.
Practical Implications: Communities of Practice can be a useful tool for knowledge sharing between research and advisory systems, but should have a degree of flexibility in terms of the topics they address and should accommodate new members when appropriate. ICT is supportive, but should be complemented by real life meetings.
Originality/Value: The paper connects recent frameworks of the use of Communities of Practice with literature on ICT in agriculture and adds insights on the contribution of combining virtual and non-virtual interaction in Communities of Practice aimed at knowledge sharing. 相似文献
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the evolution of the PCK of a cohort of student-coaches across three hybrid Sport Education-Step Game Approach seasons, and to examine the impact of protocols put in place to specifically enhance coaches’ PCK.
Participants and setting: Twenty-one students and one teacher from a school class in the north of Portugal participated in the present study.
Method: Data from multiple sources were collected: (a) videotape observations of all lessons, (b) field notes, and (c) pre-lesson interviews with the student-coaches. These were then subjected to deductive examination through a process of thematic analysis.
Findings and conclusions: Following a baseline season that identified four key limitations within the student-coaches’ instruction (task presentation, error diagnosis, feedback, and task modification), these students participated in specific coach preparation that involved modelling teacher’s instruction, pre-lesson meetings, and coaches’ corners. While showing marked improvement in their content knowledge across the second season, a second protocol was instigated during the third that involved the student-coaches to participate in stimulated reflections of their instruction and the incorporation of planning sheets to enhance their instruction. It was found that both interventions were efficacious in developing student-coaches’ PCK, which allowed a more complete transfer of the instructional responsibility from the teacher to the students. These results give insight into the importance of including coach education protocols within the design of seasons of Sport Education with respect to student-coaches’ instructional preparation. 相似文献