Introduction  

The term learning community is a term that is often invoked in various fields in the higher education space. On the surface, it seems to have an obvious meaning. A learning community is a space (physical or virtual) which affords a group (community) of learners opportunities to learn. With this definition, there is an obvious lineage with sociocultural conceptions of learning which view learning as an inherently social process. The application of this concept has led to countless frameworks which have been developed to leverage this conceptual insight as part of applied learning design strategies to leverage learning that occurs in social settings. One of the most influential frameworks within this conceptual family is the ‘Community of Inquiry’ model which was developed in the early 2000s to provide a framework for the development of online learning communities.   

The term is also associated with the affective dimension of learning and it is often associated with terms like ‘sense of belonging’. A learning community, therefore, is not just a space for intellectual growth and development but that very growth is contingent on the sense of belonging which emerges from the community itself.  

In this article, we will explore some of the intellectual currents and different perspectives on the meaning of the word ‘community’ and how it has been applied in educational contexts. We will then provide an outline of how developments in online technologies are creating opportunities for the educational community to shape what a learning community might look like for 21st century learning.  

What do we mean by community?  

Delanty (2009) points out that ‘community’ like other terms in the social sciences is contested. For example, Sociology has traditionally focussed its attention on units of analysis that are bounded spatially (towns, or neighbourhoods, for example) and political theorists have tended to explore the ideological nature of community either as an expression of nostalgia for what has been lost as a result of modernity or as an ideological expression of future forms of social and political life. Community as a form of political identity (e.g. nationalism) or as solidarity (Clark, 1973) are other lenses through which it is viewed. In terms of theorising the term, the cultural turn (Delanty, 2009) in the social sciences has led to community being seen as a space through which meaning and identity is constructed, as a symbolic rather than physical or spatial entity.  

The concept of a learning community is a combination of three elements. The construction of meaning and identity takes place through discourse (learning) within a tightly defined set of parameters (curriculum). Discourse is enacted in various modes and is likely to take place in physical sites or in virtual domains. At its core, a learning community in the higher education space is a particular type of community which operates in an environment with its own set of practices and rules.  

To guide the development of learning communities within the sector, frameworks and models have been proposed to ground the practice of the development of learning communities in learning theory. A particularly influential perspective that builds on the theory of situated learning is the concept of a Community of Practice (CoP). This concept has been applied in countless fields ranging from healthcare (e.g. https://cop.nursing.duke.edu/what-cop ) through to parent groups (e.g. https://www.aracy.org.au/ ). Its theoretical foundations are generally attributed to Lave and Wenger (Hoadley, 2012). In earlier iterations of the theory illustrated by the concept of legitimate peripheral participation, learning is conceived as a process of movement and interaction between established and new members of a community as knowledge, skills and artefacts are shared within the community. In later versions of the theory, features and dimensions of a CoP are articulated more explicitly. For example, CoPs require a domain (a shared field of interest), a practice (members are practitioners within a field of interest) and a community (members interact and share knowledge, skills and artefacts in the shared domain of interest). Design elements also feature prominently in perhaps the most well-known theoretical model of a learning community, namely, the community of inquiry model.  

Learning community and critical inquiry. The Community of Inquiry model was developed by Garrison et al. (1999) and it was originally intended as a framework to guide the development of online learning environments although it has since become more widely adopted for use in face-to-face and online delivery modes. Strongly influenced by Dewey and the role of inquiry and community in the learning process (Mason, 2023), the model proposes three interconnecting ‘presences’ which serve different functions to sustain a learning community built to promote critical inquiry. For more details on the framework, go to the article in the hub on online learning communities .  

Although this is an influential model, it is not the only framework in the field. West at al. (2017) outline the contested space of the field and they use the lenses of access, relationships, vision and function to explore the various dimensions of the concept and definition of a learning community.   

Learning community as access . This refers to the nature of presence in a community. Is face-to-face learning the priveleged mode? Or is online learning its equivalent? This question has been recently polemicised in the Edinburgh Manifesto for Teaching Online (Bayne et al., 2020).  

“Online can be the priveleged mode. Distance is a positive principle, not a deficit. New conceptualisations of space are required [in the university], by which teachers and learners can build a new, shared imaginary of contact.”  

The authors of the manifesto continue to question the ‘co-presence’ model of learning in higher education contexts as outdated. What is needed is a redefinition of contact as a form of sociomaterial presence which can be enacted in online as well as face-to-face contacts. The definition of what constitutes a learning community, in other words, requires analysis rather than relying on the traditional discourse of the superiority of the face-to-face mode of teaching and learning.   

Learning community as relationships . According to West et al. (2017) this can be further broken down into four common characteristics: belonging, interdependence, shared faith and trust. All of these can be defined as relational features of learning communities which can be enacted in online as well as face-to-face modes.   

Learning community as vision . For learning communities to function effectively, they require a shared purpose. In an educational context, boundaries are often delineated by the formal requirements of a course of study. However, the dynamics within learning communities are often shaped by the goals and objectives set by the team through which individual and team identity is constructed.   

Learning community as function . This dimension refers to the functional cohesion of communities. As West et al. (2017) point out, however, there is often an uneasy tension between parameters of function and shared purpose or vision. In any community, either or both characteristics might be missing although West et al. (2017) suggest that to design for functional coherence provides an opportunity to     develop a shared purpose. As such, functional coherence should be viewed as the most important design element of a community.  

Researching learning communities  

The complexity of the field is reflected in two articles from 2023. Prodgers et al. (2023) interrogate the student perspective on the nature of online learning communities and Prestridge and Cox (2023) investigate the relationship between the social and cognitive elements of a learning community and propose a social-cognitive typology that can be used to inform design and pedagogical strategies for the development of online learning communities.  

Prodgers et al. (2023) explore the responses of undergraduate psychology students during the Covid pandemic (2020) at the University of Leeds. The following questions were asked:  

• What does the term learning community mean to you?  

• Please provide an example of when you have particularly felt part of a learning community in the School of Psychology  

• What would improve your feeling of being part of a learning community in the School of Psychology?  

A thematic analysis was conducted on student responses and three key themes emerged from the interpretation of the data: connectedness, inclusion and togetherness. Importantly, this study indicates the importance of the student perspective to guide the design decisions and pedagogical approaches in the development of an online learning community. The findings from Prestridge and Cox (2023) can also be used to guide the development of learning activities in online settings that encourage greater levels of student participation in a learning community. In their study, undergraduate students were required to use two online platforms to participate in activities. A thematic analysis of the content of student interaction was conducted and a typology of engagement across the social-cognitive vector was developed. They identified four dimensions of student interaction from content that was both low in intensity and complexity through to student interaction that was high in intensity and complexity. This is illustrated in the image below.  

From Prestridge and Cox (2023)  

These two studies illustrate how research in the field has been conducted. We finish with an outline of some of the technologies that are currently being explored as platforms for learning communities.  

What’s next?  

There are various technologies that could have an impact on the design and future development of digitally mediated learning communities. One of these is the family of technologies related to chatbots. In essence, chatbots are conversational digital agents that provide responses to requests or questions from users. The first chatbot is considered to be ‘Eliza’, Weizenbaum’s attempt to simulate the interaction between a Rogerian psychotherapist and a patient (Natale, 2019). Subsequent systems have been developed by Apple (Siri) and Microsoft (Cortana).  

Systematic reviews about chatbots in the context of education (Kuhail et al. 2023; Okonkwo and Ade Ibijola, 2021) indicate that they are being increasingly used to provide information from assignment dates, program content and campus directions. It is not clear, however, how chatbots can contribute to the rich discursive practices normally associated with learning communities and as Huang et al. (2022) point out, their use might be limited to activities associated with some of the lower-level cognitive tasks related to the recall of factual knowledge. It is also important to consider how chatbots can be integrated into teaching practice rather than being seen as replacements for teachers (Breines and Gallagher, 2023).  The use of chatbots as part of a strategy for the design of a learning community, therefore, requires consideration of their educational function which, to date, is limited.   

The application of virtual and augmented (XR) technologies provides another option for the integration of novel technologies in the design of learning communities. Although XR has a role to play in the promotion of discursive practices (Pomerantz and Rode, 2020) it is not clear what role XR might play in improving student learning outcomes (Beck, 2019). The potential of XR, therefore, might lie in its role as a tool to promote the development of social presence in virtual domains. To explore this would require a nuanced understanding of the relationship between the application of novel technologies in educational contexts. An ‘ entangled pedagogy ’ approach might be appropriate given that this lives somewhere in the middle between a technology-driven approach to the integration of technologies and a pedagogy-driven approach. This could result in a set of affordances for XR technologies which could be used to guide the design and development of learning communities.   

Technology is a constant layer in the learning experience and its role in shaping the design of learning communities is likely to increase given the rapid advances that are currently being made in all fields of technology. It is not clear, therefore, how the orthodox, co-presence model which underpins the vast majority of learning communities will be affected in the future. This provides practitioners in the field with significant opportunities to explore how the application of novel technologies can be used to design and develop learning communities which stretch our current models of social learning processes and practices.  

References  

Bayne, S., Evans, P., Ewins, R., Knox, J., & Lamb, J. (2020). The Manifesto for Teaching Online. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11840.001.0001  

Beck, D. (2019). Special Issue: Augmented and Virtual Reality in Education: Immersive Learning Research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(7), 1619–1625. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119854035  

Breines, Markus Roos & Gallagher, Michael (2023) A return to Teacherbot: rethinking the development of educational technology at the University of Edinburgh, Teaching in Higher Education, 28:3, 517-531, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2020.1825373  

Clark, D. B. (1973). The concept of community: A re-examination. The Sociological Review, 21, 397–416.  

Delanty, G. (2009). Community: 2nd edition. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203877050  

Hoadley, C. (2012). What is a community of practice and how can we support it? In D. H.Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.),Theoretical foundations of learningenvironments(pp.287-300): New York: Routledge.  

Huang, W., Hew, K. F., & Fryer, L. K. (2022). Chatbots for language learning—Are they really useful? A systematic review of chatbot-supported language learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(1), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12610  

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6  

Kuhail, M.A., Alturki, N., Alramlawi, S. et al. Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review. Educ Inf Technol 28, 973–1018 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11177-3  

Natale, S. (2019). If software is narrative: Joseph Weizenbaum, artificial intelligence and the biographies of ELIZA. New Media & Society, 21(3), 712–728. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818804980  

Okonkwo, W.C., & Ade-Ibijola, A. (2021). Chatbots applications in education: A systematic review. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell., 2, 100033.  

Pomerantz, J. & Rode, R. (2020). Exploring the future of extended reality in higher education. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/6/exploring-the-future-of-extended-reality-in-higher-education  

Prestridge, S., & Cox, D. (2023). Play like a team in teams: A typology of online cognitive-social learning engagement. Active Learning in Higher Education, 24(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787421990986  

Prodgers, L., Travis, E. & Pownall, M. “It’s hard to feel a part of something when you’ve never met people”: defining “learning community” in an online era. High Educ 85, 1219–1234 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00886-w  

West, R.E., Williams, G.S. “I don’t think that word means what you think it means”: A proposed framework for defining learning communities. Education Tech Research Dev 65, 1569–1582 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9535-0