Communities of practice: A decolonial critique

The community of practice (CoP) theory, originally conceptualised by Lave and Wenger,¹ has significantly influenced health professions education (HPE),² contributing to our understanding of learning and professional development, with a focus on the social context of learning. CoPs offer a way of understanding student learning experiences within different contexts and focus beyond the actions of students but rather on the management of knowledge systems.³ This theoretical understanding of how learning occurs offers opportunities to explore the ways in which CoPs may serve to perpetuate colonialist tendencies and Eurocentric assumptions. This viewpoint aims to critically review learning through CoP, for the intention of decoloniality, and highlights the need for educators to develop critical consciousness.

Situated learning theory is a social constructivist approach that describes learning as occurring within the context of CoPs.¹ It emphasises human relationships and the environments in which these occur, with learning developing through the process of legitimate peripheral participation. The desired outcome of this process is co-construction of knowledge, as the learner develops knowledge based on what is modelled by the experts, and in relation to their own experiences and contexts.⁴ Lave and Wenger's theory of situated learning remains relevant to HPE as it has been instrumental in understanding the role of social contexts, and offers insights into many topical HPE issues, such as higher order learning skills and immersive experiences that address student roles, socialisation into the profession and professional role identity formation.³

Coloniality is recognised as a power structure that has outlived direct colonialism and has resulted in an asymmetrical world that categorises people and knowledge according to racial hierarchy, Eurocentric and patriarchal world views.⁵ In this regard, one view of knowledge and existence is seen as superior, with the silenced views of marginalised groups seen as underdeveloped and uncivilised.⁶ Decoloniality is an umbrella term used to describe any effort to resist and redress the process of coloniality by incorporating other, previously silenced views into the creation of knowledge in order to move away from colonial systems of power.⁵

As Lave and Wenger¹ highlight, learning within CoPs occurs through the legitimate peripheral participation of the entering learner, as well as the modelling of knowledge by experts to facilitate learning. Below, we apply a decolonial lens to critique the concepts of ‘modelling of knowledge by experts’ and ‘legitimate peripheral participation’.

The first question we ask: What happens if the experts modelling knowledge hold colonial views that are evident of dominant and exclusive ideologies? In this scenario, the knowledge held by experts may be seen as absolute, and consequently, students may be encouraged to think similarly. In a less explicit manner, educators may hold biases that are implicitly modelled in their actions and dissemination of knowledge, contributing to the structural injustices present in health care systems today. Students may not have the insight to recognise this and inadvertently continue to perpetuate these trends.⁷ If marginalised students do have the capacity to speak out and share a differing worldview or experience, they may face testimonial injustice, where their words are ignored or rejected due to being seen as less worthy.⁸

Secondly, we consider the experience of legitimate peripheral particaption. The theory of CoP describes a move from legitimate peripheral participation to full membership through the gradual acquisition of knowledge and skills.¹ Although all learners are legitimatised by their acceptance into a health professional programme of study, it is essential that the learner internalises that legitimacy, and acceptance into a programme may not be sufficient for this.⁹ When students from marginalised groups lack experts in the CoP who represent the same identities as them, they are less likely to experience a sense of legitimacy.⁹ Although there are many efforts to improve diversity and inclusion in our student populations, the change in the educator population has been much slower. This results in a cohort of experts that remain dominated by colonial identities,¹⁰ which may negatively influence the marginalised student's participation in the CoP and experience of belonging.

In decolonial scholarship, the centring of other's experiences and knowledge and sharing of other ways of doing and being are described as ways in which to decolonise.¹¹ In contrast to the above barriers, CoPs may also offer an avenue to empower marginalised communities by incorporating previously silenced views and challenging colonial legacies, as the learning occurs through the sharing of information with one another, indicating a bidirectional exchange. Furthermore, our understanding of learning in the sociocutural context could be broadened by drawing on the Global South and perspectives of collective cultures.¹² However, to ensure CoPs function in this way, it demands that the experts develop critical consciousness. This reflexive practice involves fostering an awareness and recognition of inherent power dynamics, inequities and privilege that occur in social contexts.⁷ As learning occurs between all members in the CoP, to truly facilitate decoloniality, all members must commit to the core value of promoting social justice. Only through critical consciousness of each member, and particularly the experts, will we prevent enculturation of students into a colonial way of being.

Our personal experiences have come from having diverse intersecting identities, coming from different ‘races’, and contexts. However, both authors teach in a higher education instituaton that was historically founded through colonialism and now highly values social justice and the need for decolonisation. For both authors, constant critical reflection of the power dynamics created by the country's history is a necessity and has involved developing a practice of listening more than talking. Creating opportunities for all students, but specifically those from marginilised groups, to share and shape knowledge in a co-constructed manner has led to the development of practices that are able to better serve the needs of our population. It has also required recognition that although one may be an expert in their professional discourse, there are topics they do not share the lived experiences of, and must rely on others, even when they are junior, to bring the expertise.

Implementing practices of decolonial practice can be challenging to conceptualise for educators, and although the purpose of this paper is not to offer practical implementation, using reflexivity and intentional language are excellent starting points. Explicitly recognising one's own positionality and identity can be done through statements such as ‘… as a woman, my experience of …’ or ‘I recognise that access to … is something I have been privileged to have’. In addition to this, openly recognising that others lived experiences may differ to our own creates an environment that offers inclusivity. Questions such as ‘what have other's experiences been around this issue?’ can be applied to multiple scenarios and create opportunity to co-create knowledge.

Despite our intentions, we acknowledge that this paper in its critique may perpetuate the problem. CoP is a framework developed in the ‘Global North’ and to forefront it here is to continue to privilege colonial epistemology. Further to this, in shaping this as a manuscript for publication in a pre-eminent journal, are we not enacting ‘northern ventriloquism’¹³ speaking with the voice required to be heard by a Global North audience? Although we have had to consider this deeply decolonial praxis would argue that it is acceptable to publish academically as a means of using a gap in the existing structure to begin the discussion.¹³ To that end, we are hopeful that this paper contributes to ongoing dialogue.

While the theory of CoP has been widely adopted in HPE, a decolonial lens gives us pause to consider the outworking of how learning may be enabled or limited. Developing an awareness for potential biases modelled by experts, recognising when learners may not be experiencing equitable legitimate peripheral participation, and a collective commitment to promoting social justice are all key to beginning the work of decoloniality. As a starting point for educators, focusing on listening and asking inclusive questions will begin to lay the foundation needed for this essential work, and the intentional development of critical consciousness. Embracing diversity, legitimising other knowledge systems and challenging colonial power dynamics can further contribute to a more inclusive and equitable CoP. In doing so, HPE can better serve the needs of all communities, ensuring a more just and pluralistic approach to learning.

Michelle Hannington: Conceptualization; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. Lynelle Govender: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing.

The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

No ethical clearance required for this viewpoint article.