Marc Chagall - The Concert
In thinking in entrepreneurial ways concerning employment after graduation, the role of community becomes important. What do you think about the way Froehlich describes a "community of practice?" How does that differ from how you might identify 'community?' Why is it important that we think about community, how it is defined, and how we perceive ourselves in relation to community?
I found this an interesting thought. I thought about my community. I live in Southlake. I accompany about 50 students during UIL season, I go to the football games where 350 band members representing about 300 families play. I interact with maybe 20 of those families because those parents are involved in the marching season activities. I go sit in the stands where about 8 to 10 thousand people come to support the high school football team and the other students involved such as the band and the drill team and the cheerleaders. And yet, while we are all there for some of the same reasons, and I could use the term "community", it is not what I think of as a community. Even on my block, in my neighborhood, a community does not exist that fits my definition.
ReplyDeleteI define community as a group of people that I interact regularly, know who each other is and what they believe, I am comfortable with them and am not surprised by the behavior of the others in the community.
A "community of practice" seems to be a way to connect individuals who have a similar problem and who care enough about the problem or issue to seek a solution. These individuals could be part of the same geographic community or be on the other side of town, the state or even in another country. The important part is that the group has a common cause.
The article itself brings up a good reason to think about and identify what "community" is. If I do not understand the people I am trying to communicate with, those people may not understand what I am trying to say. If music education is important to my school district, I need to be able to articulate its importance in terms that a banker and a lawyer and a housewife can understand. If the banker and the lawyer and the housewife also think that music education is important but can not explain that to their neighbors in a way that is understood, the message goes unrecieved. It is a little like eye witness accounts of an event. Everyone that witnessed the event will recount it from their own point of view. Often the accounts seem to disagree because people were standing in different places and veiwed the event from different angles. It is not that anyone is lieing, it is the point of view they saw the events that cause the discrepencies. The way the local band director views music education is going to be different than the banker, the lawyer and the housewife. The fact that there is common ground may not be discovered unless the band director takes the time to understand how the banker, the lawyer and the housewife view music education.
How I percieve myself in relation to any community effects how I interact with that community. I find that the community at the football game holds little interest for me. I am there for the band. I love football but my primary interest in one particular student performing in the band. I do not have very much in common with the parents of the football players and often there is an underlying animosity between the band parents and the player's parents. Part of the reason is my perception of how I am viewed by the player's parents. I might find that we have a lot in common and could be a "community" but I come in with preconceived ideas that have been reinforced by experience over that last 8 years. In this case, my perception of myself and my perception of how the other parents perceive me has prevented a true community from forming.
If I am seeking to form a community of practice, or any community for that matter, I must be willing to put my preconceived ideas and biases aside and look at the issue from someone else's point of view. I must also find people that will do the same. In other words, for a community of practice to form and to work, I and the others involved, must be open minded. This is something most people, including me, would say that are, but in reality, is very difficult to do because, in the world of music education, our passion often gets in the way of clear thinking.
The Froehlich article discusses some interesting aspects of community and forming community, but due to its intended audience of school music teachers, doesn't lend itself well to a discussion of entrepreneurial community building. In terms of the school teacher, the geopolitical forces are generally well defined, and the intended "community" is too. Although "the public" may be too general a term we can certainly see some boundaries for the school community in terms of students, teachers, parents, administrators, and the media.
ReplyDeleteTechnology, in the form of instant accessible communication, and social networking, leads to a whole different set of implications in terms of community. No longer does a community need to be defined in geographical terms. Communities can be created, interact, and dissipate very quickly. This leads to difficulties in some ways- it is hard to attract and retain active members to your community when there are so many choices of communities. But it also allows for greater trial and error. As musicians this is a great thing because we can discover more about our audience than ever before, and we can also connect with more potential audiences. Our enhanced communication leads to much greater opportunities for community building and interaction.
The definition of a community, in my opinion, has changed with the advancements in many areas, such as technology, that have led us to the twenty-first century. It seems, that one important aspect of a strong community is that of communication. Furthermore, it would seem that with the advancements in technology and communication, today's communities would be stronger and more communicative. However, is that really the case?
ReplyDeleteWhile we have the world at our fingertips in a tiny hand-held device, there seems to be a social disconnect in terms of one-on-one interaction. The days of Leave It to Beaver, where everyone knew everything about one another are completely gone. More often than not we speculate and cyber-stalk, without making the effort to cross the street to shake a hand. I am not trying to suggest that the type of community from the 1950's would be appropriate as a model for today's society, however, as the article stated, it is the definition that must fit the changing times. While we can research and be as well-educated in terms of barious geographic regions or this social statuses, it is our ability to digest that information and use it in a positive effort to of communication that clearly allows for a community. I agree with Froelich's defintion of a community, and feel that it is that expanded view that transcends a group.
Entrepreneurially, the definition of community and the way it is valued, in terms of the importance of a community of practice, can have varying effects upon success. Not only an understanding of your surroundings, but an open mind and a willingness for acceptance can help any entrepreneur enter into a state of success. This definition reminds me of a friend I went to school with. This particular saxophonist won a position in one of Washington D.C.'s premiere bands. Upon moving the Maryland he began taking in his surroundings and setting up his musical visions for success. He had always been interested in new music and collaboration while in school. One of his final recitals he collaborated with a guy running turn tables and basically made new arrangements of pieces with the help of the turn tablist. I got a chance to pick his brain last month while his band was on tour. He desribed how his first year in Maryland he worked on making friends with important persons at an art museum in Maryland. He presented the idea of a new music concert series, fully understanding that the outside community would take a while to warm-up to the idea. To make a long story short, I believe his project is in its fourth or fifth season and it is just flourishing. He was successful because he formed a community of practice. He did his research and stuck through the project through thick and thin. (You can follow his blog at http://briansacawa.com/blog/)
To be a successful contributor to any community, there is a certain amount of understanding, education, and patience involved. As artists, our minds do not function like the rest of the community (which is probably a good thing!) Because of this, it seems that we must always be on the creative edge. Not only within our specific career, but also in our relations with others when trying to promote or career. One of the most effective comments in Froelich's article was in the conclusion. "Reaching out in the community becomes living purposefully and consciously in the community." When you are the one going against the grain, any minute detail that is against the normal current seems like a giant wave of disention. Therefore, our purposeful actions can lead us closer to our entrepreneural goals without completely losing our audience or support.
The idea of a “community” seems to be constantly in motion and evolving as time passes. I was just speaking with my grandmother when she was in town last weekend and she asked me how I liked my neighbors. At first, I was ashamed to say that I didn’t know anyone else in my building, but then I realized that that wasn’t necessarily a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteWhen I grew up, it was unusual not to know everyone in the entire neighborhood. However, that isn’t necessarily feasible for me in the situation I am in now for several reasons. One of those reasons is that I am in a MUCH larger area and there are a good number more people in my apartment complex alone than in my entire neighborhood growing up. Another is technology. With the advance in technology, it is much more convenient to use my cell phone and ask someone how they are doing rather than going to their door to say hi.
Where my community when I was growing up was my neighborhood, now my community has turned into my network of friends. My community involves people all over the world rather than just people in a 2-mile radius of where I live. This seems to line up with what Froelich describes in his “community of practice”: as a community of people that is for a practical purpose. That is what I consider my community – one of both social and professional colleagues.
There were a few specific sentences in the article which struck me in particular:
ReplyDelete"...The further removed they [other people] are from our own reality, the more single-focused their individual selves appear to us because we do not recognized the complexities of the empirical selves in each of the individuals we refer to as "others.""
I think this makes it clear that - facebook or not - there is a disconnect no matter what. As is also pointed out in the article, in addition to not truly understanding the roles of those around us, we have very little awareness of how our roles affect other. Regardless, it's not practical or possible to know the complexities of the life of each person you interact with. As musicians, we may feel that you can connect with a large group of people through performing as your playing is often influenced by your own life experiences.
The comunity of practice is defined as a group of individuals with a common view on an issue or topic, and use eachother and the group as an outlet for their knowledge and for exchanging ideas to advance their knowledge and impact individually and collectively.
It's weird, when I first hear the term "community," I do think of something positive and "warm" as Wenger suggests in the article. I guess that could be because we all want to be part of something, and when we consider ourselves part of something larger with others who feel the same way, it makes us feel good. Also, community centers, community fund-raisers, community musicals, all carry a positive vibe and imply that strength is being built within a group of people who all want to impact eachother positively. I guess when I really think about it, that's not what community might actually mean. If someone asked me "who do you consider to be part of the same community you feel you're a part of," I would probably say "a bunch of people I don't know and will probably never directly have anything to do with." I guess that means I consider it to be very broad - people somehow connected - even if loosely - by location, common interest, etc., who are all trying to accomplish the same broad goal of contributing something to the world.
I often associate communities in two ways: the first includes the groups of families that live in the same neighborhood and children who go to the same highschool. (Geopolitical) The other idea of community encompasses groups of individuals that are brought together by a common cause: a fraternity, sorority, facebook group, studio or a network of musicians. This second idea of community closely resonates with the community practice because a group of individuals are unified by one particular problem or passion on specific subject. However, (I as much as I would like to) I have not experienced enough instances where groups of individuals gather to discus particular unifying topics without imposing the importance of their opinion on the rest of the group. (Fortunately those experiences have only taken place in a certain music fraternity that was comprised of students)
ReplyDeleteWhen I think about how I could apply this to my career, I see myself involved in more of a network type setting where the common bond that holds the group individuals together is based on a system of exchanging services that lead to more connections within different circuits. It is interesting to observe the differences between networks and communities and how they both interact. They both seem to be particularly useful in bring people together for concerts or events. But in this case, networks seem to be more business oriented and objective based rather than open forums of discussion.
Personally I think it is important to acknowledge the different types of communities because I can definitely see myself having more interactions with communities of practice than what I consider a “normal” community which would consists of the people who live within my proximity. Regardless of who I am interacting with, the process of effectively engaging with any type of community would involve a open, non biased approach.
I wrote this last week, when no one else had posted yet, but couldn't post it, so...that's why I don't comment about anyone else's post. :)
ReplyDelete---
Froehlich's "community of practice" is an interesting take on community, which may indeed promote growth in the area with which that group is concerned. It is open-minded and academic and may benefit those who seek to discuss change. I tend to prefer a more personal approach, however, an approach more direct in helping people.
There are two main forms of community which I value. The first is the support group--those people to whom you can go when you are having a bad day, when you do not necessarily want anyone to *fix* your problems, but just someone to be with you through them. As music educators, we can find this community in fellow teachers, maybe even in some students, and in outside contacts such as family/friends/church groups.
The other form of community is what Froelich calls a "geo-political" community--those around us whom we may not know but whom we nevertheless affect in some way. We need to be aware of this community; it affects us just as much as we affect it. As music educators, we need community support for our programs to survive...but we cannot expect to gain that support if we do not reach out to the community ourselves. Also, many teachers want to "make a difference"; one's "geo-political" community is a wonderful place to start.