Making them Count - Creating alignment within Communities of Practice
Published: 10 March 2026
So recently I started doing a thing! That thing being studying for a Master’s degree in Creative Teaching and Learning Design. At some point I should probably write some more words about why I’ve embarked on this journey given I’m not known for being a teacher- or a designer and my single A-level definitely suggests academia isn’t my jam…but that feels like a messy and personal story I’m not in the mood to write today.
What I can tell you is that I’ve been spending A LOT of time over the last 4-5 weeks with my head buried in a variety of learning design course materials, and it’s been a bit of a revelation. For the first time, I’m properly digging into what, why, when, where and how we learn. It’s fascinating and I’m really enjoying the challenge.
One of the topics interesting me over the last two weeks is Situated Learning Theory. It grabbed my attention because within the theory is this notion of Communities of Practice (CoPs). Working in the world of digital transformation in the public sector I immediately recognised the concept and it was interesting to delve into the research of Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger who coined the term.
If you haven’t read them yet, my brilliant colleague Tash Willcocks who is TPXimpact’s Head of Learning Design (aka someone who REALLY KNOWS this shizz) wrote two cracking posts about Communities of Practice. She covered what they are and the bloody hard work it takes to make them actually work. Tash is as you would expect spot on - I agree whole-heatedly with her that learning isn’t just about absorbing info; it’s about “humaning” together.
As Etienne Wenger (one of the godfathers of CoP thinking) put it:
“Learning is an integral part of our generative social practice in the lived world.”
But as I sit here pretending to make sense of all the “Learning Design” related thoughts that have been thrown my way over the last month, I’ve started wondering: are there ways we can make our communities even more intentional without losing their soul and authenticity?
The “What” and the “So What?”
I’ve experienced and been part of many CoPs over the last 10 years of my career and my experience is that most CoPs are a bit… err …vibey?! We get together, we share some “unfinished work” (as Tash suggests), and we leave feeling a bit more connected. That’s great. Actually it can be bloody lovely and in itself useful. But what if we were more explicit about the learning outcomes we’re aiming for?
I know “outcomes” sounds a bit like corporate-speak, but stay with me. How could a community agree on a set of clear goals that would help us articulate and better communicate what we actually want to get from the community. Yes learning nerds I’m riffing on the well established theories in John Biggs’ Theory of Constructive Alignment.
In the classroom, Biggs argues that you should align your outcomes, your activities, and your assessment so they all point the same way. In a CoP, that might look like:
- The Outcome: “We want to be able to map complex systems more confidently and consistently.”
- The Activity: Instead of just a chat, we run a live, messy mapping session on a couple of real projects.
- The ‘Assessment’: Not a test (god no! I hate tests. Everyone does- right?!), but a reflective peer-review of that map.
When the activity actually helps us reach the goal, the “hard work” Tash mentions feels a lot more rewarding. I’m not talking revolution here. I think CoPs are mostly great as they are. I love vibey! I’ve felt the benefits of many. I just wonder if some small tweaks could make the learning feel more intentional and rewarding.
A knock-on effect of this intentionality might be in making it easier to evidence to Senior Leaders the benefits and impact CoPs bring to an organisation, thus making holding the time and space for these crucial learning spaces easier. It’s not what John Hattie was talking about when he suggested “making learning visible” but I’m happy to build on his thoughts. If learning is visible it can be seen and valued, and not necessarily just from the perspective of the learner but by those who need to create the conditions in which learning can happen.
Emily Webber (another super smart CoP legend) has written and shared some really practical tips on the subject of measuring communities of practices. Note to self - I need to get hold of Emily’s book and read more.
One of the trickiest bits of a CoP is that we aren’t all at the same level. In Situated Learning, this is called Legitimate Peripheral Participation. It’s the journey from being the overwhelmed new person on the edge of a community (the novice) to a seasoned old hand, showing and telling us how things can be done in the centre (the expert).
One of the risks inherent in many CoPs is that these roles aren’t necessarily clearly defined or understood. I’m not sure clear definitions would be helpful but I do worry that being an expert in a particular area of practice does not necessarily make you a great facilitator, coach, mentor or collaborator. If we want our CoPs to thrive, we need to support these experts and help them learn the skills and behaviours that allow a community to flourish. Maybe we need more CoPs for CoPs. Too meta?
Could having explicit outcomes make a CoP more accountable and also potentially create some space to better and more transparently support the ‘experts’ that provide the vital scaffolding? I think so.
Not “accountable” in a ‘you didn’t hit your KPIs’ way, but in a ‘is this actually worth our time?’ way. When we know what we’re trying to learn, we can see the progress. We can celebrate when a novice moves toward the centre of the circle. We’ll be able to see the threads connecting our Wednesday afternoon chats to the actual quality of the work we produce and the impact we’re delivering.
So, what am I thinking?
I’m leaning towards a “Yes, and…” approach.
- Yes to the messiness and the human connection.
- And a bit more intentionality in how we design the learning journeys that we want to see happening within that mess.
If we co-design our goals, align our activities to them, and actually support our experts to lead the way, we move from just “having a community” to “practicing with purpose.”
What do you reckon? Are your CoPs more explicit about what they’re trying to achieve (if so, please let me know), or are you just enjoying the vibes?
Further Reading
- Communities of Practice: Introduction to Communities of Practice (Wenger-Trayner)
- Constructive Alignment: A Guide to Constructive Alignment (Queen Mary University of London)
- Visible Learning: Visible Learning - Information About What Works Best (John Hattie)
- Situated Learning / LPP: Lave and Wenger on Situated Learning (New Learning Online)
- Practical guidance on Communities of Practice (Emily Webber)
