The assumption that teachers can create and maintain the conditions that make school living and school learning stimulating for children, without the same conditions for teachers, has no warrant in the history of [humankind]. Larry Cuban

Have you noticed how education seems to have a hard time dissociating itself from values debates? In the movement toward school choice-charter schools, vouchers, schools within schools-we are seeing played out the ideological struggles mirrored in our political system as a whole. In many districts, school boards have become battlegrounds where back-to-basics, academics-only philosophies compete with "progressive" efforts to educate the "whole child."

In the last few years, first "learning environments" and then "learning communities" have been offered up as models for thinking about instruction, based on the dual platform of technology and constructivist theory. Rather than forcing students to swallow instructional packages like pills, learning environments are meant to offer students an abundance of resources to explore. Alternatively, learning communities put the emphasis on the whole group, with students collaborating and supporting each other towards various learning goals. In both cases, students are expected to buy into the system and cooperate. Both learning environments and learning communities depend heavily on student and teacher buy-in, responsibility, and continuing motivation. Both approaches also typically rely on rich information and learning resources.

Will learning communities turn out to be just another fad? Do they depend on students and teachers sharing a common political ideology? How can we get some perspective on this? Very often trends in education have historical roots and are reflected in similar changes in commerce, government, or popular culture. In the section below we offer a quick historical tour and an overview of systems in society and other settings. We believe that learning communities can be an important vehicle for realizing the visions of educational reformers. We will show how technology can lend support to learning communities. We then develop the concept of learning communities and suggest ways of nurturing a sense of community within classrooms and beyond.

IDEAS AND TECHNOLOGY COMING TOGETHER

Education in the 20th century is marked by the frustrated progressivism of figures like Dewey, Piaget, and Vygotsky (Farnham-Diggory, 1992). These innovators saw the need to radically change our educational system, which often placed institutional needs ahead of children's learning needs. Behaviorists like Thorndike and Skinner offered a similar critique of the status quo, though with a very different emphasis on developing more efficient, effective strategies for conveying information and skills to students.

While these theorists inspired generations of practicing teachers, the realities of the classroom inhibited innovation, forcing compromise and, in too many cases, complacency as teachers' dreams ran up against a roomful of students, each with unique needs, desires, and demands. It turns out that students' individual needs, which the theorists were trying to acknowledge and address, became the very downfall of programs which proved incapable of managing such a complex task. The resources and systems required were simply not available. Thus in the end, educational visionaries have often been viewed as ultimate failures because their prototype schools and programs were not widely replicated and diffused (Farnham-Diggory, 1992).

Technology has been promoted as an important enabling mechanism to help make these visions of education a reality. There was nothing wrong with the theories, argue technology advocates, but we lacked the means of realizing these theories in the classroom. Just as technology has achieved productivity gains in business and manufacturing, we can expect technology to help with the "work" of education. So now, if a teacher can't respond individually to thirty students at the same time, maybe a computer lesson can-providing individual feedback to keep errors private. If the school can't afford a field trip to the museum, then a video or CD-ROM can bring images and presentations to the classroom. If students need access to information, they can search the Web. In spite of certain limitations-lack of intelligence or flexibility, limits in resolution, inequitable access, etc.-technology can help make theorists' progressive visions viable and affordable.

A breakthrough has come in the form of the Internet and networking technologies. The Internet, particularly the World-Wide Web, has become more than a source for retrieving archived information; it has become the medium that connects scattered people and resources together.

In many ways, the Internet's strength lies in its decentralized nature. Did you know that nobody is in charge of the Internet? There is no systems operator in Washington D. C., keeping everything working. The Internet is the ultimate distributed network, linking users and institutions of all kinds together, allowing interactions of all kinds to occur. The Internet is a libertarian's dream come true!

Thus just as computer lessons can provide individualized instruction and feedback, the Internet can become the communications vehicle that both liberates and ties learners together, including students and teachers, into coherent learning communities. Through its powerful communications and information-access capabilities, the Internet can be part of the glue that keeps people connected-talking with each other, noticing and appreciating differences, working out divergent views, serving as role models and audiences for one another. The education future portended by the Internet, therefore, is not isolated, individually tailored to each child; rather, it is a community-centered future that accommodates the individual through the workings of the larger community.

SYSTEMS AND CHANGE

Another way of gaining perspective on learning communities is by looking at society at large. It seems almost trite to say that we are in the midst of a revolution brought on by networking technologies and related ideas. Social critics conclude that we have moved out of the Industrial Age, past the Information Age, and now find ourselves in a new time, various dubbed the Communication Age, the Network Age, or the Knowledge Revolution (cf. Betts, 1994; Savage, 1996). Do you have trouble keeping up with the changing times? Maybe we should name our time the Age of Constant and Continuous Change-The one thing that seems constant is change itself!

Actually, networks and change go hand in hand. Complex adaptive systems-essentially huge web or networks-provide the needed flexibility for change and adaptation to occur. Let us illustrate this connection by reference to a few cases outside education.

Biology. According to biologists, life forms thrive by replicating-but at the same time changing. The variation found in offspring allows a species to adapt to the demands of a changing environment. Organisms become complex, adaptive systems as cells take on increasingly specific functions, working toward the integrated and coordinated goals of the whole unit. Ant-hills, bee hives, schools of fish, and flocks of birds further demonstrate how individuals can contribute to the functioning of a larger whole. Fritjof Capra (1996) refers to the complex network of living organisms as the "web of life." Indeed, all of us are part of that complex, adaptive network that seems to adapt to whatever obstacles or constraints are thrown at it, most recently and incessantly by humans themselves.

Economy. In a free economy, the stock market seems to have a life of its own. Comprised of innumerable players, each seeking one's own individual welfare and prosperity, economies rise and fall in waves of change. Individual investors or small companies are free to pursue profitable enterprises, yet their individual actions fit so comfortably into a whole pattern; the sum total of free decisions yields a discernible intentionality or directionality in the overall market. Compared to the fixed, hierarchical economies of the former Soviet bloc, modern free markets are geniuses, showing remarkable adaptability and intelligence. When nobody is in charge, the market thrives. When someone gains control and takes charge, the market's adaptability and capacity to change-its learning potential-is stunted. We call that a monopoly or a fixed market, and it serves the interests of an elite few rather than the whole group. The messiness and chaos of a free market is preferable, and will yield higher productivity in the long run.

Management. In a market and world where change is the norm, how can individual businesses continue to thrive? Gone is the heyday of the simple hierarchically managed business, where decisions are made at the top and reverberated down through the ranks. Modern businesses, in order to stay competitive, have granted greater autonomy and responsibility to workers and work units. High levels of communication, information access, and flexibility in method result in corporate cultures that can readily adapt to changing competitive conditions and can respond to those changes faster and more successfully. Corporations are now also seen as complex adaptive systems. Senge's (1990) view of businesses as "learning organizations" has been echoed by a chorus of management theorists calling for decentralized, responsive methods of business organization and operations.

Government. Paraphrasing Churchill, democracy is recognized as an inefficient, costly, and frustrating method of government-but it's the best we've been able to come up with in the history of civilization! An amazing thing happens when thousands of individual interests are pooled together, when people of widely divergent views come together into a single body to pound out differences and come up with legislation. Somehow out of the pluralism and conflict, we muddle through. And in some respects, the consensual position is truer or more appropriate or more right than the individual positions, because they reflect a collective wisdom and judgment.

Cognitive science. How do all those little neurons in our brain become an intelligent mind? Neurons are the ultimate in simplicity-electrical impulses, like computer bits, are either on or off, fired or inhibited. Yet from such simplicity is built the complex organization of mind. Most cognitive theorists nowadays see our brains as yet another case of complex adaptive systems. Intelligence emerges out of the workings of simple parts.

So back to our question-Are learning communities just another educational fad? Seen as complex adaptive systems, networks become the mechanism that allows adaptation and change. And adaptation and change equates to learning. Thus, while a business organization "learns" by adapting to its environment, so teachers and children learn when they respond and adapt to each other and to information resources. As we have seen in a variety of settings, adaptive change goes hand in hand with a certain kind of structure-not hierarchical, static, or centrally controlled, but decentralized, complex, dynamic, web-like networks of collaborating contributors. When classes or groups of students function together like that, they become more capable of learning.

At the core, our interest is in the cultivation of a certain quality of relation among teachers and students. Learning communities are united by a common cause of mutual support and learning, and by shared values and experiences. They may originate from assignment (e.g., typical K-12 classrooms) or through self-selection (listservs on the Internet). Learning communities provide a means for learning within an atmosphere of trust, support, common goals, and respect for diversity. They make use of various technologies-machines, products, information sources, even language itself-to accomplish their goals. Learning communities existed long before networking technologies came into being, but the potential scale of adoption expands with the technologies newly available.

Modern network technologies hold a key advantage that early visionaries did not enjoy: Students and teachers can more easily break the confines of the closed classroom and open things up to include elements of the outside world-other classes, students, teachers, and experts; other information, projects, and media. As Riel (1996) noted:

We send children to school to give them the opportunity to move beyond the constraints of family and friends to open to them a vast range of possible futures. However the classroom in today's society, by its very nature, is constraining. It isolates both students and teachers from many experiences that will help them to understand the past, develop skills for building a future, and to prepare for their role as citizens.... If it once took the whole village to raise a child, then can we expect a succession of isolated teachers to give students all the skills they need to [be] productive members of society? (Riel, 1996; text re-ordered)

Students can be introduced to much more of the "world out there" through communications and multimedia technologies.

The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1994) developed a list of core values and principles for learning communities, presented in Table 5-1 below.

1. Curriculum and Instruction --Emphasizes active, problem-focused teaching and learning. --Integrates subject areas. --Emphasizes varied instructional strategies depending on student needs. --Relies on heterogeneous, collaborative student groups/teams. --Focuses on project-based activities, while also giving attention to the development of key concepts and skills. 2. Assessment --Focuses on thinking and communicating as well as on concepts and skills. --Is authentic. --Informs instruction. --Gives schools the flexibility to respond to the uniqueness of the population they serve, while still being held accountable to state and national goals and standards. 3. Professional Development and School Organization --Provides meaningful opportunities for education to learn and improve. --Redefines "professionals as isolated experts" to "professionals as collaborators and facilitators of learning." --Keeps decision making open and responsive to parent, student, and community input. 4. Community Connections --Keep parents involved in their children's education. --Create shared responsibility for children and cooperative efforts to provide resources and support for learning. --Ensure adequate and coordinated health and social services for children. Foster a concern for the common good. 5. Technology --Supports all areas of the learning community-learning, assessment, management, professional development, and community connectedness.

Table 5-1. The Peabody Perspective on learning communities. From The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1994.

The Vanderbilt Perspective contributes to our discussion in two ways. First, it articulates in greater detail the instructional-design foundations that learning communities rest upon. Careful attention to the design of projects and curriculum is something inherited from the fields of instructional design and cognitive psychology. Second, the Peabody Perspective places learning communities within the school and community context, addressing issues such as assessment, support from the larger community, and management. This larger perspective further underscores the huge task of developing and maintaining learning communities, and the many systemic factors that must be incorporated into successful efforts.

At this point, we may be sounding about as idealistic as the educational visionaries who began the discussion. Two responses teachers may have at this point are:

1. The ideas sound fine, but how, more specifically, can technology help make this happen?

2. When you talk like this, I get frustrated. My students and my working conditions are not even close to the ideal. What can I do today or tomorrow to improve my classes?

Much of the remaining paper deals with these two issues. First we briefly review examples of technologies and programs making use of those technologies. It should become clear that the Internet has become a kind of petri dish for growing collaborative innovations that can help us move our classes toward new paradigms. Enormous resources are available online that we can only touch on. Second, we articulate in greater detail specific qualities found in learning communities. Finally, we discuss ways that you can begin thinking about and taking action right now to help your classes begin moving toward the learning community ideal.

In this section, we review both the underlying technologies and related activities and programs that allow learning communities to take shape.

Communication Level	Description	Enabling Technologies	Learning Activities
One-alone	Individuals can access information resources stored on the World-Wide Web. These resources can also be used by groups.	Online databases and journalsSoftware librariesTutorials and job aidsOther Web resources	Independent inquiryResearch and writingBrowsing
One-to-one	Individuals can communicate to other individuals using e-mail, and arrange for individual learning experiences such as internships or independent studies	E-mailChatting technologies using text, audio, and/or video	Apprenticeships and internshipsE-mail posts, private consultationsOne-on-one chats
One-to-many	Individuals can broadcast information to entire groups; information can also be "published" at websites to allow others access.	Distribution listsWeb pages as a source of text and multimedia displaysWeb pages as links to outside resources	Lectures and symposiumsPublishing results of research and inquiry activitiesConvenient access and dissemination of resources
Many-to-many	Groups of people can engage in open communication, through various discussion and activity forums, both real-time and asynchronously.	ListservsChat and conferencing technologiesMUD and MOO systems	DebatesDiscussion and support groupsGroup exercises and projectsMUD and MOO learning activities

Table 5-2. Learning activities facilitated by different levels of computer networking technologies (adapted from Paulson, 1996).

COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

Computer-mediated communication or CMC is the technology of using computers as a medium for communications between people or groups of people as they collaborate and work together. CMC is a newly established area of study within human factors engineering. Engineers are joined in this study by social scientists from a variety of disciplines-cognitive science, social psychology, anthropology, industrial/organizational psychology. Indeed, most CMC research is conducted in work settings rather than educational settings. But educators appreciate the substantial similarities between "work-work" and schoolwork; we would expect CMC to hold some useful insights for teaching and learning. A variety of learning activities can be associated with different levels of interaction, shown in Table 5-2 above.

The table shows how communication technologies-primarily e-mail, conferencing, and Web-facilitate a variety of learning activities, particularly those requiring collaboration and group effort. Moreover, technologies useful for individual or one-on-one interactions are subsumed and appropriated by collaborating groups, resulting in a fairly powerful set of tools available to groups and communities.

Care should be taken, however, to keep the technology in a support role and not get romantically enamored with the tool itself. Riel (1996) observes:

Building physical space should not be confused with building community. A [listserv], a conference or a web page, in and of itself, does not define community.... It is the interactions and partnerships among... the people who gather in these places that define a community. And these interactions will come to be perceived as "real" in the same way that we see talking on phones or listening to a president's address on television is real. These experiences do not replace face to face contacts, any more than phone conversation[s] replace meetings. They provide another form of social exchange that augment relationships and have real consequences.

Thus the technologies (column 3 of Table 5-2) and the learning activities (column 4) serve an instrumental role in support of learning communities, and are not ends in themselves.

Harasim (1991 and 1992; cited in Paulson, 1995) reports a number of learning activities based on her use of telecommunications at Simon Fraser University. Her list demonstrates that telecommunication technologies can be used internally within classes if students have sufficient access to workstations. Activities appropriate for secondary school teachers include:

--small-group discussions to complement in-class activities;

--learning partnerships and dyads (for general learning support);

--small working groups (for team projects and presentations);

--informal socializing through an "online cafe;"

--technical help.

Such online discussions and workgroup activity can be conducted within class, or as part of activities reaching beyond the class. Eisley (1991) also developed a number of innovative techniques to keep online discussions fresh, such as the use of twenty questions, polling, and debates.

Judi Harris (1994; 1995) has developed a list of "activity structures" suitable for classroom educators, demonstrating the variety of activities that telecommunications enables:

1. Interpersonal exchanges. These activities give students an opportunity to interact with others from a distance. By doing so, they come to appreciate how differently people see and make sense of their world. They also have opportunities to reinforce literacy skills through extended reading and writing activities. Harris (1995) cites several examples:

--keypals;

--global classrooms;

--electronic appearances;

--electronic mentoring; and

--impersonations.

2. Information collections. The focus of these activities is on collaborative, distributed collection, analysis, organization, and presentation of information. Students can participate in every step of this process. Information activities may help students internalize scientific methods. They may also strengthen students' information literacy skills. Examples include:

--information exchanges;

--database creation;

--electronic publishing;

--electronic field trips; and

--pooled data analysis.

3. Problem-solving projects. These projects focus on individual, small-group, or multi-group problems. They often require higher levels of collaboration and organization between sites. Students have opportunities to learn task-management skills in addition to content objectives. Examples include:

--information searches;

--parallel problem solving;

--electronic process writing;

--serial creations;

--simulations; and

--social action projects.

Classroom learning communities may look to members for their interactions, or they may venture out and create alliances with other classes and individuals. We believe that both kinds of interaction are important. Community begins with interactions among members, but can also be strengthened and defined by its outside encounters. We briefly review below a couple of "inside" and "outside" examples of technology supports for learning communities.

INTENTIONAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

CSILE is a classroom model for student inquiry and knowledge generation, developed by Marlene Scardamalia and Carl Bereiter of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. CSILE stands for "computer-supported intentional learning environments." Two important features of the CSILE system are:

--a special computer program for developing a common information base, typically installed on a local-area network, and;

--a systematic model of inquiry based upon the scientific method and informed by current research in cognitive psychology.

CSILE includes "intentional learning" in the title because students are encouraged to make school more meaningful by being mindful and goal-directed in their pursuit of learning objectives. Learning is not a by-product of CSILE activities; it is a direct goal. Like scientists, CSILE participants approach a problem, develop hypotheses or theories about the problem, then seek to confirm, modify, or discard their theories through research, observation, and interpretation. Also like scientists, participants collaborate, review each other's work, and publish their confirmed results.

The theory behind CSILE is largely embodied in the software program used for entering, archiving, and retrieving student research. For example, students must select a label for each message they send, based on a simple set of categories. Examples are given in Table 5-3 below.

Problem (Andrea): How does a cell function? My Theory (Andrea): I think a cell functions by oxygen coming into the cell and the cell then can do its work by breathing. My Theory (Jane): I agree with your theory but when the cell functions I don't think it is breathing. I think that the oxygen you're breathing in is doing it. My Theory (Sue): I think a cell functions by the "things" inside itself. (organelles) I Need to Understand (Andrea): How does the oxygen get into the cell, if the cell really does breath oxygen? My Theory (Sue): I don't think that cells breath oxygen, I just think that the cells need oxygen to do their work. But if the cells do breath oxygen, I think there is some kind of a tube in the cell that helps the cell get the oxygen it needs. New Information (Andrea): I found out that the cell takes food and oxygen in through the membrane. This happens regularly The cell then changes the food and oxygen into energy. It uses the energy to do its work. I Need to Understand (Andrea): How do the food and oxygen get to the cell's membrane? My Theory (Andrea): I think there are very small tubes that lead to each other and the food and oxygen go down those tubes and into the cell through the cell's membrane. My Theory (Sue): I disagree with your theory, Andrea. I think that the oxygen and food go into the cell automatically as a daily process. I Need to Understand (Sue): What does the oxygen do when it gets to the cell? My Theory (Andrea): This is what I think the oxygen does when it gets to the cell. I think that the oxygen goes into the cell through the membrane and then it goes to the nucleus where it is turned into energy.

Table 5-3. Example of a CSILE discussion note. The various names (Problem, My Theory, etc.) are selected by students as they prepare messages. Adapted from Scardamalia and Bereiter (1996).

To get a better feel for CSILE as a learning environment, you may wish to browse the CSILE website.

CSILE can be applied to various subjects, but science in particular. Unlike many online projects which resemble electronic field trips or online databases, CSILE is a comprehensive model for inquiry designed to help students conceptualize and research a problem area. As such, it is at once more easily adopted within contained classrooms (relying less on outside Web access), and more demanding (requiring students to follow strict rules of reasoning and inquiry). Also in contraast to many online projects, considerable research has been conducted on CSILE, consistently demonstrating positive effects on learning (Scardamalia, Bereiter, & Lamon, 1994).

LEARNING CIRCLES

Learning Circles have been sponsored by AT&T over the last several years, and have recently been made available publicly on the World-Wide Web. Developed by Margaret Riel and a team of collaborators, Learning Circles employ a "task force structure" (Riel, 1991). Like a task force, learning circles have a heavy work or activity orientation. Groups of classrooms, usually about eight, sign on to communicate and collaborate from a distance, following a timeline to accomplish a defined task. The specific task may be any of a number of different activities, such as research, information sharing, compilation of a database, or publishing on a common subject. Riel (1996) also likens Learning Circles to local chapters of a larger organization, like scout troops affiliated with a larger council. Local troops "set their own goals and tasks but remain connected to those who work in other locations as part of a community with shared goals and values." She describes this cooperation between local and larger levels:

In online Learning Circles, as in scout troops or in a Red Cross task force, the overall task and structure is clearly defined. There are enough examples for participants to use at every step. However, the members of the circle, troop or task force, know that they can take control and develop the ideas that arise from the participants. (Riel, 1996)

Learning Circles are often organized in support of a specific project or online activity. For example, the World-Wide Web provides a number of interesting resources, such as:

--a tour of the White House;

--a webpage describing and showing sacred lands of a Native American tribe;

--a NASA project allowing access to space-shuttle pictures and data;

--a virtual museum, with exhibits, artifacts, and descriptions.

Whereas individual students may choose to visit and browse these resources, or a teacher may incorporate them into a unit, Learning Circles extend the usefulness of such resources by allowing collaboration and comparisons between classes on work related to the website. In this way, Learning Circles can transform a relatively simple online resource into a deeper and more meaningful learning experience for whole classes.

A variety of other models for collaborative projects are available online, including KidLink projects and Global SchoolNet (formerly called the FrEdMail Network). Some, such as the CoVis project, have been carefully designed and studied by cognitive scientists (Edelson, Pea, & Gomez, 1996). Others are smaller and more grass-roots based, developed by innovative teachers in various subjects and grade levels across the globe.

Virtual worlds have also begun to appear on the Internet. MUDs (multi-user domains) and MOOs (object oriented MOOs) are virtual environments that you enter and participate in. Derived from online Dungeons and Dragon environments, some MUDs have an educational focus, such as MIT's Micromuse. Users can enter the virtual environment and travel between locations-for example, homes, museums, coffee shops, or science labs. Visitors not only interact, but, depending on their level of experience, can participate in the design and construction of the environment itself. Presently MUDS are text-based, but advances in virtual-reality and multimedia technologies will soon result in graphic depictions of these virtual environments.

Probably the best way to sample the pleasures of various online projects and resources is to devote a half-day to browsing the Web.

Learning communities can be fostered through communication, attention to differences, shared culture, adaptation, dialogue, and access to information resources. Each of these facilitating features is discussed below.

Communication. Imagine a classroom-perhaps a televised lecture-where the teacher sends out signals but has no means of receiving feedback from students. In such a scenario, the teacher's activities can spin wildly out of control, becoming less and less appropriate to students' needs. Students may be completely lost or completely bored, and the teacher has no way of knowing an adjustment is needed.

Communication is the key that allows people to make adjustments to each other. "Feedback" is given not just for correctness of answers, but in all sorts of subtle, informal ways, resulting in a feeling of inclusion and accommodation. Students come to feel, "I am being listened to, understood, and respected." Teachers can feel, "I am having some kind of impact." Effective communication among members allows the group to acquire a personality and sense of direction, transcending the views and needs of individuals.

Attention to differences. Like all complex adaptive systems, learning communities thrive on differences. Every group member shares some things in common with the group and holds other things unique. Most differences among group members go no further than the individual learner; however, every so often a different perspective or strategy will be found to have utility within the group as a whole. As different perspectives and strategies are routinely shared throughout the group, the powerful results of some innovations are noticed and diffused, eventually changing the practice of the entire group. Thus differences between community members are a key to growth and sometimes lead to innovations that everyone can benefit from. The risk-taking, creative attitude that leads to innovation is equally important to the group's success.

Shared culture. Appreciation of diversity is, however, only half the story. To move from "group" to real community, people need to feel bound together by something strong and enduring. This could be a shared goal or objective, such as passing a critical exam or producing a new product. Beyond outcomes, though, communities are fostered by a shared set of values, reflected in a local culture. "Culture" is like water to a fish-It's everything that's all around, but we tend not to notice-How we talk, walk, listen, and participate; all the unspoken, unwritten rules that govern our behavior toward each other. Every learning community develops a local mini-culture, complete with accepted norms, practices, rituals, and language.

Teachers, as classroom leaders, are critical in setting a tone, creating expectations, and negotiating acceptable values. The teacher's influence comes through both precept and example. If a teacher occasionally belittles or ignores or dismisses the needs of a student, then class members feel license to act that way toward each other. If a teacher is judgmental or arbitrary in asserting certain facts or knowledge to the group, then where are students to learn the rules of reasoning and support for claims? A successful conveyance of certain values-tolerance, respect, willingness to take risks, openness to change, commitment to hard work, etc.-make building communities much more feasible.

Online communities in some ways will mirror classroom communities, and in other ways will have greater latitude at defining themselves. Riel (1996) noted:

There will always be a sense of adventure and excitement associated with frontiers-they are wild and free. We can design "places," within technical and social constraints, in ways that allow us to experiment with social reality. Freedom from time and space does not automatically lead to rewarding patterns of social discourse. Online communities face the same issues of freedom of speech vs. censorship, of security and control, of private and public spaces, of inclusion and exclusion, of unity and diversity, that exist in all social organizations. It takes intense and continual social negotiation to find the best balance between absolute freedom for citizens and collective control.

As online collaboration increases, teachers will need to address these same issues over and over. But that's good, because that's the way the world really is!

Adaptation. A good teacher enters a classroom with an agenda-learning goals, planned activities, methods for assessing progress, etc. At the same time, that teacher will be sensitive to the needs of the group. Within the first day of a new school year, a teacher may throw out the window certain planned goals and activities, realizing that the particular mix of students dictates adjustments in the plan. The teacher will adapt to the needs of the group. Similarly, students quickly learn to adapt to the style of the instructor and the norms of the group. Adaptation is result of the change process, which we have seen is synonymous with learning-which is what education is all about.

Dialogue. What's the difference between argument and dialogue? In an argument, your job is to define a position and support it, to the point of convincing your advocate or a third party of the superiority of your position. A true conversation or dialogue is something different. You actually listen to the personal across from you with the hope of learning something new. Dialogue, in the best sense, is not oppositional or confrontational; rather, it is just the opposite. Dialogue involves a willingness to suspend one's beliefs in favor of listening to another, to surrender and give up one's position if doing so serves the needs of the group. Within a community that values dialogue, reasoned arguments still have a place, but they should be conducted with mutual respect and trust toward all participants.

As you can imagine, cultivating an atmosphere of dialogue is not easily accomplished. In our culture, a willingness to surrender one's position and defer to the group seems almost un-American! Powerful forces push all of us toward a style of jousting competitiveness, flexing of muscles, posturing, and pretense. Yet these behaviors that are so easily the norm need to be tempered by the cultivated and taught values of dialogue, conversation, and commitment to the interests of the whole group.

Access to information. Open, unrestricted access to information is the lifeblood of a democracy. In a similar way, access to multiple sources of information becomes critical for the success of a learning community. Students look to teachers as role models for reasoning more than as information dispensers; thus students can come to respect the teacher's opinion without depending exclusively upon it. Finding ways to triangulate and cross-compare evidence only serves to strengthen one's position and perspective. In many ways, the vitality of a learning community depends upon the quality of the information available to it.

Some Internet critics are concerned about all the "garbage" available out there-not just the pornography, but the unreliable, unsubstantiated information. How can students be expected to weigh, evaluate, and determine the usefulness of information on the Web, much of it conflicting and inaccurate? To these critics we respond-Welcome to the real world! Amid the conflicting perceptions and worldviews, our students can only learn by jumping in and participating. Rather than be shielded from complexity, students need to be guided through it and taught methods and tools for managing it. Formally trained librarians, who may be tempted to eschew Web resources in favor of more respectable published outlets, need to support students in their acquiring the "information literacy" skills needed to help them evaluate information from a variety of sources, Web as well as non-Web (Walster, 1995).

Membership. Who participates in learning communities? Participants must be learners, willing to change and grow according to the goals and activities of the group. Certainly students are learners, but so are teachers. Teachers read and critique papers and projects, learning as they do so. They listen to students and learn from their interests and research. Teachers, for example, who lack technical skills with the Internet, can often be taught by the gurus in class who seem to know the answer to every question. The community thus is strengthened by its interdependencies-The teacher need the class "techno-geeks," just as the students need the direction and support of the teacher. As St. Paul noted, "members," like hands and feet to the body, are needed parts contributing to the healthy functioning of the whole community. Thus moving toward learning communities becomes a powerful staff-development exercise for teachers. Teachers should prepare to go into "high learning mode" and stay there for awhile!

Outside experts can serve the role of "visiting scholar" within the learning community. While the experts' role is primarily to provide consultation and advice, the learning circle extends to include them as well. Experts should not be shocked when students ask questions that leave them at a loss; the normal flow includes having to go back to resources for answers. Experts unprepared to engage in the dialectical process of learning and teaching will prove to be of limited utility to the learning community.

Learning communities can also establish relationships with outside groups, at times forming a larger collaborating community. This is all to say that learning communities are not defined in fixed, immutable terms. Members may drift in and out, alliances may be formed with outside individuals and communities. While they enjoy a degree of coherence, communities typically have "soft" boundaries.

Motivation. A continuing thread in the discussion is this: Learning communities depend upon autonomous, responsible, motivated learners. But pull on that thread, and the fabric becomes unraveled. What can we say to the teacher who says, "My students just aren't motivated for this"?

Here is a Catch-22 about any activities that empower students:

--doing it can be incredibly motivating for students, but

--helping students get to the point of doing it can be a struggle.

That is to say, how can students decide they like something when they haven't seen it? And how can they come to see the advantages of an activity unless they cooperate?

This problem calls for a systems perspective. Just as students can devolve into a loop of negative outcomes-working less at school, liking school less because they're not working, leading to even less engagement-so they can begin a loop of rewards and reinforcement-getting a taste of empowerment and ownership, leading to more engagement, which in turn allows further empowerment, etc. Classes become communities by learning a step at a time. Granted, motivation is a key component to the success of learning communities, but striving toward learning communities is a key to motivation!

Every teacher should be a lifelong student of how to motivate students (and themselves). The science of motivation is constantly coming up with new perspectives. For example, Rueda and Moll (1994) move beyond cognitive variables to address cultural and social variables impacting motivation. The larger view will likely recognize the benefits of learning communities.

MOVING FROM HERE TO THERE

Here are some responses to the teacher looking for ways to convert these ideas into some concrete actions in the classroom:

1. Remember-The concept of learning communities is an ideal. Nobody ever attains is completely. So relax; don't worry about perfection. Movement is the thing. Which way are you and your students moving? Are you approaching community, or moving away from it?

2. Technology, resources, and models can help. There is nothing magic about the technology, but certain activities and expectations are feasible with access to the Internet that would have been unthinkable without it. Just as you may require that a paper be typed or word-processed, with access to appropriate tools and resources, you can raise the bar and heighten your students' expectations for what can reasonably be done.

3. It's not all or nothing. Many of the models and technologies discussed here can be used in a variety of ways. Yes, each innovation takes work to integrate into the curriculum, but take it in small steps, observing effects and making adjustments as you go. Just as you ask your thoughts to be thoughtful and innovative, your integration of new technologies is like a perpetual action research project of your own.

4. Respect your own knowledge and situation. Let's say you decide to engage in a Global Schoolhouse project. Al Rogers (1994) has a helpful model and checklist for embarking on such a project, and a website with links to accompanying literature and support (see Table 5-4). Nonetheless, your classroom is unique. Your own learning community goes beyond whatever model used in its inception or design. Moreover, your success in adopting any particular framework or model depends as much on local factors as on the details of the model itself. The mix of students and teachers, the available technology and facilities, the expectations of school and surrounding community, your insights and energy as project leader-These will account for the success of the project at least as much as the quality of the thinking that went into the model in the first place. Another way of saying this is-The community is not its model. Some theorists may forget this sometimes, but you never should lose sight of the primacy of your own experience and expertise!

How to Design a Successful Project 1. Design a project with specific goals, tasks, and outcomes. The more closely aligned with traditional instructional objectives, the better. 2. Create a timeline. Set specific beginning and ending dates with deadlines for participant responses. Make a timeline that allows for lots of lead time for announcements and recruiting. 3. If possible, do a small-scale tryout with a close colleague. 4. Announce your project. Create a "call for collaboration" following a standard template, available online. Post your first call for collaboration six to eight weeks before the starting date. Repeat your call again two weeks before the starting date. Include in your call: --goals and objectives; --grade levels desired; --how many responses you would like; --contact person; --timeline and deadlines; --your location and complete contact information; --examples of the kinds of writing or data students will submit; --what you will do with student and team submissions (teams will need some interaction or other incentives to collaborate). 5. Find and train students. You will need a cohort of responsible and trained students to help you with the project. This step becomes an essential time-saver when using technology in the classroom. 6. At the project's conclusion, follow through on sharing project results with all participants, including hardcopy of all publications, a web-published, class-written project summary, and student-written thank-you notes. Also send the summary to your pri ncipal, PTA president, superintendent, and school-board president.

Table 5-4. Steps for successful design and completion of Global SchoolNet projects, adapted from Rogers (1994).

5. Your leadership as teacher is critical. Riel (1991) stressed that networking technologies and Learning Circles are not magic. In a talk several years ago, she reflected:

I have probably had as many network failures behind me as I do successes. It isn't easy... In fact the progressive education of the sixties failed, to a large extent, because people misunderstood the role of the teacher... as well as the problem of the technical support...

[T]eachers were told that they were supposed to be facilitators and that kids would learn on their own, teachers stood back and waited for things to happen.... People again and again, think that you can put the technology in place and if you give people the communication potential, that suddenly, education is going to happen all by itself. (Riel, 1991)

We suspect that Riel's success rate has improved over the years, but her remarks pointedly remind us to contain our expectations about our students and about the innovation. Indeed, students can learn to work on their own, but teacher support and guidance along the way becomes even more critical to success.

A central goal of ours has been to present some key ideas, then let you as a teacher find ways to incorporate those ideas into your daily practice. With years of experience, you are smarter than we are. You know your students, your school, your community. You can adapt concepts to your own situation; in that respect, you are much smarter than any technology or textbook ever devised!

Margaret Reil (1991) tells a story about a four-year-old in her mother's office.

The mother, wanting to involve her daughter in her work, realizes the daughter has never heard modem noises, and begins explaining:

"You've seen these words on the screen. Well, this little modem takes those words and turns them into sounds. They go on the telephone lines just like someone talking, and a computer on the other hand is going to get them. Then that computer will send them to other computers. So my message will be sent all over the world!"

The child looked up from her coloring and said, "Oh, like a talking drum."

The mother, dumbfounded, finally asked, "A talking drum?"

"You know, like a talking drum." The mother thought some more, and then she remembered that not long ago, an African storyteller had visited her daughter's preschool and shown the class an African drum. When villagers wanted to get a message out to neighbors about a festival or a market, they would use the drum, and the message would be sent from village to village.

The point of the story is that modems and networks may now be new and exciting, but people have always found ways to communicate with each other and establish communities; they have overcome obstacles and used considerable ingenuity in doing so.

Years ago, John Dewey commented on the dangers of a complex society like ours that relies on schools and classrooms to convey essential knowledge and tools to its youth:

As societies become more complex in structure and resources, the need for formal teaching and learning increases. As formal teaching and training grows, there's a danger of creating an undesirable split between the experience gained in direct association and what is acquired in school. This danger was never greater than at the present time on account of the rapid growth of the last few centuries, of course, and technical modes of skill. (cited in Riel, 1991)

The split between experience and academic learning is a serious concern. As we have tried to illustrate, technologies of various kinds can serve as bridges between academic learning and students' outside experiences, if they are used in the right way within a supportive context.

Of course, there's risk involved in moving your classroom from a controlled system to a more open, collaborative system. Things can get messy, chaotic, out of control. Some days you won't want your assistant principal dropping in! You may occasionally find yourself over your head in innovation, and need to retrench and solidify your gains. Being a technology or curriculum innovator can sometimes feel like walking a tightwire between chaos and control, with not only you on the wire, but your students with you! But innovation is the only sure antidote to boredom and frustration, for students and teacher. Working towards learning communities means you, along with your students, will be learning for a long time to come.

Betts, F. (1994, April). On the birth of the Communication Age: A conversation with David Thornburg. Educational Leadership, 20-23.

Capra, F. (1996). The web of life: The new scientific understanding of living systems. New York: Anchor Books.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1994). From visual word problems to learning communities: Changing conceptions of cognitive research. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 157-200). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. (1996). Constructism in the collaboratory. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 151-164). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Farnham-Diggory, S. (1992). Cognitived processes in education (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.

Harasim, L. (1991). Teaching by computer conferencing. In A. J. Miller (Ed.), Applications of computer conferencing to teacher education and human resource development (pp. 25-33). Columbus OH: The Ohio State University. Proceedings from an International Symposium on Computer Conferencing at the Ohio State University, June 13-15.

Harasim, L. (1992). Foreward. In M. F. Paulsen (Ed.), From bulletin boards to electronic universities: Distance education, computer-mediated communication, and online education (pp. i-iii). University Park PA: The American Center for the Study of Distance Education.

Harris, J. (1994). Way of the ferret: Finding educational resources on the Internet. Eugene OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

Harris, J. (1995, February). Organizing and facilitating telecollaborative projects. The Computing Teacher, 22 (5), 66-69. [Online document: http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/Mining/February95-TCT.html]

Paulson, M. F. (1995, August). The online report of pedagogical techniques for computer-mediated communication. [Online document: http://www.nki.no/~morten]

Riel, M. (1991, June). Transcribed lecture on children, learning, and computer-mediated communication. Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, June 30th, 1991. [Onine document: http://bolt.lakeheadu.ca/~facedwww/Kerlin/Riel.html]

Riel, Margaret (1996, January) The Internet: A land to settle rather than an ocean to surf and a new "place" for school reform through community development. [Online document: http://www.gsn.org/gsn/articles/article.netasplace.html]

Rogers, A. (1994). Keys to successful projects. [Online document: http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/Guidelines/Rogers.html]

Rueda, R., & Moll, L. C. (1994). A sociocultural perspective on motivation. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr. & M. Drillings (Eds.), Motivation: Theory and research (pp. 117-137). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.

Savage, C. M. (1996). Fifth generation management : co-creating through virtual enterprising, dynamic teaming, and knowledge networking. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Scardamalia, & Bereiter (1996). Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. In S. Vosniadou, E. De Corte, R. Glaser, & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (149-163). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.

Scardamalia, Bereiter, & Lamon (1994). The CSILE Project: Trying to bring the classroom into World 3. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 201-228). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency/Doubleday.

Walster, D. (1995). Student centered information literacy programs. School Library Media Annual. Englewood CO: Libraries Unlimited.