Although there isn’t a fixed recipe for involving specific members in a CoP, literature review on Communities of Practice for inclusion-related dilemmas exposes examples of CoPs including parents, teachers and special education teachers (Mortier, 2018; Mortier et al., 2010), as well as CoPs with teachers, other professionals and students from a school (Thompson, 2007).
In addition to this, the literature review revealed that a CoP is most successful when it consists of 6 to 8 members (Walton et al., 2019). Depending on the specific issue of the CoP and in line with a focus on promoting inclusive education, various aspects of diversity should be considered. Thus, an interprofessional CoP can include professionals from different disciplines working within a school setting, such as, ...
principal and school board
class teachers
special needs teachers
learning and teaching assistants
social workers
school psychologists
therapeutic professionals
…
Moreover, when it comes to working together to promote inclusion and well-being for all, the voices of students and their families must be heard alongside those of professionals.
Ideally …
… the different professions work together on the same subject using their respective methods.
… students and their families are actively involved.
… the best-qualified person for the current issue takes the lead.
… members of interprofessional teams treat each other as equals and know and recognise the expertise of the other professional groups.
(Sozialdesign, n. d.)
The fixed core team of the CoP can be partially enlarged by additional members who bring new perspectives and knowledge and support the solution finding process. However, additional members may pull the focus of the CoP in different directions. Thus, a clear structure of the CoP and well-defined levels of participation are key to ensure the successful collaboration towards a shared result.
If schools aim to implement CoPs successfully within the context of inclusion, the defined goal(s) focuses on one or more of the following dimensions of diversity. This makes it even more important to ensure that these aspects of diversity are also reflected in the composition of the CoP team itself. By intentionally including members who represent a range of diverse experiences and perspectives, the CoP can more effectively address the complex and multifaceted nature of inclusive education.
Reflection task(s)
Develop a visual representation of your CoP core team. Reflect on which aspects of diversity are already represented within the group. Which perspectives are present, and which might be missing? How might these influence the way your CoP approaches inclusive education?
If you are in the process of forming a CoP, consider which colleagues, students, or other stakeholders could be involved in order to ensure that a broad range of diversity dimensions is represented. Who might bring valuable insights or lived experiences that would enrich your CoP’s discussions and actions?
References
Mitchell, D. (2016). Diversities in Education: effective ways to reach all learners. Routledge.
Mortier, K. (2018). Communities of Practice: a Conceptual Framework for Inclusion of Students with Significant Disabilities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(3), 329–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1461261
Mortier, K., Hunt, P., Leroy, M., Van de Putte, I., & Van Hove, G. (2010). Communities of practice in inclusive education. Educational Studies, 36(3), 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690903424816
Sozialdesign. (n. d.) Interprofessionelle Zusammenarbeit. https://www.socialdesign.ch/interprofessionelle-zusammenarbeit/
The Society for Diversity (2023). Communities of Practice Handbook. The Society for Diversity.
Thompson, S. A. (2007). A Community Just for Practice: A Case of an Inclusive/Special Education Course [Abstract]. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue Canadienne de l’éducation, 30(1), 171–192. https://doi.org/10.2307/20466631
Walton, E., Carrington, S., Saggers, B., Edwards, C., & Kimani, W. (2019). What matters in learning communities for inclusive education: a cross-case analysis. Professional Development in Education, 48(1), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1689525
