This paper describes a how using an online or virtual Community of Practice (VCoP) supported the professional development of five Early Career Academics (ECA) in science education in New Zealand. Four of the five ECAs were employed in permanent positions in New Zealand universities and the fifth was an independent researcher. All participants had either received their PhD within the last five years or had not been in full-time employment at a university for more than five years when this CoP was formed. The VCoP was facilitated and mentored by an experienced academic.  

Becoming an academic can be a stressful, isolating and challenging (Patton & Parker, 2017). Juggling a high teaching load, and endeavouring to produce quality research to obtain or maintain permanency can impact one’s health and career longevity  (Hollywood et al., 2020). For ECAs in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) the transition may be difficult as they seek to balance their teacher identity with their researcher identity (van Lankveld et al., 2017). Professional development and mentoring may support ECA’s successful transition (Rienties & Hosein, 2020).  However, as most ITE ECA come to academia with a background as a practicing teacher, there is a need for professional development that recognises their expertise in teaching  (MacPhail et al., 2014) but also their need for development as researchers.

This study  used Wenger’s (2018) Communities of Practice (CoP) as a conceptual framework to explore the social learning that was undertaken in the online ECA community as well as an analytical lens (see methodology).  His theory of learning incorporates four components – the community in which the learning takes place, our identity within that community, how we discuss our practice and make meaning. A CoP has been described as “groups of people who share a concern or passion for something they do and learn how to do it as they interact regularly” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015, p. 2). CoP vary in configuration – ranging from those intentionally devised by management to support learning to those facilitated and others that are self-driven and organic in nature (McDonald et al., 2012). This particular VCoP meets online and uses a virtual space for  “socializing, learning, identification and emotional and affective exchange”(Maretti et al., 2022, p. 336).

This study will add to the literature on Communities of Practice exploring Initial Teacher Education (MacPhail et al., 2014; Patton & Parker, 2017) and supporting ECAs (Mulholland et al., 2023; Rienties & Hosein, 2020). It seeks to answer the following research question:

How does this Community of Practice support ECAs in science education to develop their practice and research capabilities?

The methodology used in this research is embedded in the identities of the two researchers – who identify as pracdemics –practitioners (science teacher) and academics (lecturing in initial Teacher Education) (Dickinson & Griffiths, 2023). They wanted to explore how the online community of which they were members, supported the development of its members in their research and practice dimensions. Ethics approval was obtained to investigate the phenomena and consent obtained. Only limited confidentiality was possible due to the small number of academics in the field in New Zealand. The participants in this study were the members of an online CoP initiated in 2022 to support the development of ECAs in science education. Four of the five ECAs were involved in Initial Teacher Education, with the fifth working in primary education and independently researching. The sixth member was an experienced academic who recognised that there were several ECA in science education and wanted to support their transition into academia. The CoP met online monthly to talk about research and practice within the science education field. The study is positioned within an interpretivist-constructivist worldview (Cohen et al., 2018) where reality is viewed as fluid, containing multiple perspectives and meaning is produced and reproduced out of social interactions between the participants and the researchers. All participants were interviewed by the two researchers. Semi-structured interviews were chosen to allow the participants to express their views of the community of practice and allow for in depth probing and spontaneity (Cohen et al., 2018). The interviews were conducted by TEAMS with the audio being recorded as well as the first transcription of the interview. A form of collaborative reflexive thematic analysis was undertaken (Braun & Clarke, 2019). Initial familiarisation with the data occurred after the interviews when the researchers discussed the interviews. The initial TEAMS transcriptions were reviewed, and transcripts searched for codes. To allow for transferability, it was decided to use Wenger’s (2018) Community of Practice categories – community, identity, practice and meaning-making as overarching themes. Both researchers reviewed the themes and data segments attached and interpreted the findings through the lens of current literature. The findings obtained have been checked for validity by providing a rich description, member checking, acknowledging disconfirming evidence and peer review (Creswell, 2018).

Findings show that belonging to this VCoP was important for all members including the mentor/facilitator. Members prioritised the time allocated to the meeting monthly due to the ‘warm relationships’ they had with each other. They wanted to share the personal as well as the professional. However, this trust occurred over time. Choosing to have the CoP online mitigated geographic isolation. Despite not being able to meet face-to-face, members found the community useful in lessening their perception of being an ‘impostor’ and legitimising their identity (Pyrko et al., 2017) as an academic within science education. Having a regular time to share what one was doing in practice and research was important as it provided space to check feasibility of future projects, clarify expectation, discuss challenges and share successes to others in the field, rather than to management where stakes may be higher (Mulholland et al., 2023). While the major focus of this VCoP was research focused, knowledge about science learning, effective practice and curricular reform was supported through conversations that occurred in the community (Patton & Parker, 2017), albeit in an oblique rather than focused manner. The VCoP allowed education and our individual and collective place within academia (Pyrko et al., 2017). It also provided the participants with confidence and competence to participate in research, attending conferences, writing for academic purposes, teaching in ITE. It widened member’s access to resources and connections with the science community both nationally and internationally through invited guests and contacts from other members. While this study closely examined one small COP in ITE in science education in New Zealand, the findings could easily be transferred to other educational settings, especially where the members are geographically isolated. Supporting ECAs in this manner is a useful method of developing their research and practice capabilities.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (Eighth edition. ed.). Routledge. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/AUT/detail.action?docID=5103697 Creswell, J. W. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Third edition. ed.). SAGE. Dickinson, J., & Griffiths, T.-L. (2023). Introduction. In J. Dickinson & T.-L. Griffiths (Eds.), Professional development for practitioners in academia: Pracademia (Vol. 13, pp. 1-10). Springer. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33746-8 Hollywood, A., McCarthy, D., Spencely, C., & Winstone, N. (2020). ‘Overwhelmed at first’: the experience of career development in early career academics [Article]. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(7), 998-1012-1012. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2019.1636213 MacPhail, A., Patton, K., Parker, M., & Tannehill, D. (2014). Leading by example: Teacher educators' professional learning through communities of practice. Quest (00336297), 66(1), 39-56. https://ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=s3h&AN=94241256 Maretti, M., Russo, V., & Lucini, B. (2022). Resilience in online communities of practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: an Italian case study [Article]. International Review of Sociology, 32(2), 332-351. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2022.2114871 McDonald, J., Star, C., & Margetts, F. (2012). Identifying, building and sustaining leadership capacity for communities of practice in higher education. . www.olt.gov.au Mulholland, K., Nichol, D., & Gillespie, A. (2023). ‘It feels like you’re going back to the beginning…’: addressing imposter feelings in early career academics through the creation of communities of practice [Article]. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 47(1), 89-104-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2022.2095896 Patton, K., & Parker, M. (2017). Teacher education communities of practice: More than a culture of collaboration [Article]. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 351-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.013 Pyrko, I., Dörfler, V., & Eden, C. (2017). Thinking together: What makes Communities of Practice work? [Article]. Human Relations, 70(4), 389-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716661040 Rienties, B., & Hosein, A. (2020). Complex transitions of early career academics (eca): A mixed method study of with whom eca develop and maintain new networks [Article]. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00137 van Lankveld, T., Schoonenboom, J., Beishuizen, J., Croiset, G., & Volman, M. (2017). Developing a teacher identity in the university context: a systematic review of the literature [Review]. Higher Education Research and Development, 36(2), 325-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1208154 Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). An introduction to communities of practice: A brief overview of the concept and its uses. . http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/ Wenger, E. (2018). A social theory of learning. . In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning : learning theorists ... in their own words (Second edition. ed., pp. 209-218). Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315147277