School and University Partnerships for Peer Communities of Learners” (SUP4PCL) was funded under the ERASMUS+ programme. Peer communities of learners (PCLs) were established as partnerships between European EU and Egyptian educational institutions. These partnerships were intentionally collaborative and collegial, creating an Egyptian-European professional community of learners to support the transformation of culturally embedded practices (Elhawary et al., 2020). This paper will discuss the case of Alexandria University (AU) in Egypt which was twinned with University of Northampton (UoN) in the UK. This university partnership aimed to explore and examine the processes of establishing, developing and sustaining a peer community of learners within an Egyptian cultural context. Alexandria University also worked collaboratively with several student teachers, establishing further peer communities of learners aimed at developing and embedding change through reflective practice in teaching and learning.

The primary research focus of this project was on its impact at university level within both the cross-cultural and intercultural contexts of Egypt and UK. Firstly, it aimed to establish how school-university partnerships enhanced the development of peer communities of learners (Elhawary et al. 2020). Secondly, it aimed to establish the impact of these PCLs on the transformation of professional learning practice at university level (Elhawary et al., 2020). Thirdly, considering the cultural aspects that are embedded within developing partnerships and communities, it was important to study any tensions in beliefs, values and practices (Elhawary et al., 2020). This paper will focus on this final question because it goes to the very heart of transforming cultural practices through PCLs, and are key considerations for encouraging collegiality and collaboration.

Establishing peer communities of learners was central in this research. ‘Peer’ here is crucial because it implies an equality between individuals. This concept of peer is particularly pertinent in cultures such that traditionally favour a hierarchy of positional leadership (Frost, 2015) with uncritical deference towards top tiers based on seniority. Professional communities of learning are often defined interchangeably with communities of practice where knowledge is generated within their boundaries (Underwood & Joshevska, 2019). There is a potential source of tension in the differing values, expectations and compteting demands of those within the community. School and university partnerships offer connections to teaching, learning and practice. Key to understanding this professional learning context is its common focus on developing a shared knowledge base alongside social interaction (Underwood & Kowalczuk-Waledziak, 2019).

A key factor within school and university partnerships was the affirmation and empowerment of community members that this model espoused. Community members are encouraged to develop and progress over time from positions of peripherality as knowledge receivers, to more central roles as constructors of community knowledge (Wenger, 1998; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015). By gaining knowledge, community members experience personal and professional development. More experienced members offer a form of mentorship that provides appreciation and affirmation for newer colleagues,  empowering them to develop and become more deeply embedded within the community and take more central roles (Wenger, 1998; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015). Newer members build personal self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997) in the self-perception of their personal capacity to be effective. These peripheral members provide a form of reinforcement and similar affirmation for more experienced members by acknowledging and learning from their expertise.

Benefits for community members as ‘extended professionals’ (Joshevska, 2016) contributing towards the development of others, include the possible building of resilience and collective resources (Hoyle & Wallace, 2009; Baker-Doyle, 2017; Joshevska, 2016). However, there are also some possible challenges. Collegial working arrangements may not always be achievable, especially where cultural practices do not encourage collective and reflective experiential learning within a vision of non-positional leadership (Frost, 2015).

The purpose of this study was to explore in depth the experiences of the participants and the processes involved in building peer communities of learners. Therefore the project was a purposely qualitative study in two distinct stages (Newby, 2014). These stages ran concurrently to triangulate the data of each stage (Flick, 2018). Multiple data sources in the form of structured interviews, focus group discussions and vignettes offered validity by the corroboration and triangulation of data from the voices of the participants (Flick, 2018). It was particularly important to understand the culture and context of peer communities of learners at Alexandria University. Therefore the first stage data focused on examining the concept of PCLs within teaching and learning practices at Alexandria University. A structured interview was used to explore participants’ understanding and current use of PCLs within their departments at AU. This interview focused particularly on the formal and informal processes, relationships and challenges to forming PCLs at AU. Second stage data were collected concurrently with the purpose of gaining further in-depth understanding of the processes and experiences of establishing and embedding a PCL within a department at AU. This stage used four sources of data: focus group discussions with PCL team members at AU, reflective journals from AU and UoN faculty staff, a vignette written by an AU PCL member and a focus group discussion with groups of student teachers at AU. The data from both stages were equally weighted in the analysis as they were combined in a thematic approach towards answering the project research questions. Analysis of the data used a process of inductive open coding where initial codes were written in transcript margins and then placed into categories by systematically cross-referencing against new initial codes (Charmaz, 2017: Rubin and Rubin, 2012; Silverman, 2014). As further data were analysed, this initial process of open coding became combined with a simultaneous process of axial coding, where broader categories and themes were developed outwardly from repeated use of similar code titles (Charmaz, 2017; Miles, Huberman and Saldana, 2014). This was an iterative process of reviewing codes alongside new data, repeated paraphrasing, summarising and re-naming codes (Silverman, 2015). The final part of this process involved cross-comparing the different data sources to ensure that the analysis remained secure against the themes that emerged.

Peer communities of learning might be viewed positively, but collegiality and collaboration take time and cannot be forced (Frost, 2015). Developing PCLs requires relationships that are built on trust and reciprocity. They are more akin to friendships, and were often suggested as becoming like ‘family’ (Elhawary et al., 2020). All community members need to feel genuine ownership of the core values and beliefs of the group. Central among these are respect, trust and cooperation, where all members believe they are supported to develop professionally within the community. Forming PCLs requires effective communication and working relationships. Clear expectations and ground rules are crucial. Tensions may arise when some members do not feel they have a voice within setting these, or that perceived cultural norms are not respected (Elhawary et al., 2020). The challenge is to encourage all members to experience personal empowerment and develop self-efficacy, enabling them to progress from peripheral members to more central roles within the community. It is crucial for PCLs to foster relationships built on mutual respect and equity through the provision of space that encourages the contributions of all members based on a fundamental value for their individual experiences. It is a PCL that provides space and time for non-positional leadership (Frost, 2015) to be facilitated, even within a culture based on principles of authority and hierarchy (Elhawary et al., 2020). Inter-related with building trust and relationships, was commitment to the community. Commitment cemented further trust and relationships, leading to greater collaboration, collegiatity and personal affirmation. Members were encouraged to adopt different, more central roles within the community. Relationships that provide positive affirmation with peers enable members to define their roles. However, this challenge might be especially acute in cultures favouring individualism, competition and promote isolation, which is an approach common within Egyptian universities and schools.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Co. Baker-Doyle, K. (2017). How Can Community Organizations Support Urban Transformative Teacher Leadership? Lessons From Three Successful Alliances. The Educational Forum 81:4, 450-466, DOI: 10.1080/00131725.2017.1350242. Charmaz, K. (2017). The Power of Constructivist Grounded Theory for Critical Inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23 (1), 34-45. Elhawary, D., O’Shea, A., Underwood, J., Elkharashi, S., Hammoud, D.E. & Elkhaial, N.H. (2020). School and University Partnerships for Peer Communities of Learners. SUP4PCL Case Study: Alexandria University and University of Northampton ERASMUS+ Project Number: 573660-EPP-1-2016-EG-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP. Cairo, Egypt: AUC Flick, U. (2018). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 6th Edition. London: Sage Publications Frost, D. (2015). The role of teacher leadership in the transition to democratic society. Paper presented at the European Conference on Education Research (ECER) 2015. Budapest, Hungary. Joshevska, M. (2016). The Voice of Extended Professionals –Learning Community Members. Project Report for Foundation for Education and Cultural Initiatives “Step by Step”. Skopje, Macedonia. Hoyle, E., & Wallace, M. (2009). Leadership for professional practice. In S. Gewirtz (Ed.), Changing teacher professionalism: international challenges trends and ways forward (pp. 204-214). Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. and Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. London: Sage Publications Newby, P. (2014). Research Methods for Education. 2nd Edition. New York: Routledge Rubin, H.J. and Rubin, I.S. (2012) Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Silverman, (2015). Interpreting Qualitative Data. 5th Edition. London: Sage Publications Underwood, J. and Joshevska, M. (2019). A proposed typology of knowledge sharing within communities of teachers: a comparative case study focusing on England and Macedonia. IAFOR Journal of Education. 7(1) Underwood, J. and Kowalczuk-Walędziak, M. (2019). Professional Communities Among Teachers: A Summary of a Conceptual Framework. Polish Journal of Education Studies. 71(1) Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Learning in a Landscape of Practice: A Framework. In E. Wenger-Trayner, & B. Wenger-Trayner. Learning in Landscapes of Practice: Boundaries, Identity, and Knowledgeability in Practice-Based Learning (pp. 13-31). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.