Social Network Analysis and Evaluation of Communities of Practice of Teachers: A Case Study

  • Maria De Marsico
  • Carla Limongelli
  • Filippo SciarroneEmail author
  • Andrea Sterbini
  • Marco Temperini
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8699)


Communities of Practice (CoPs) may be interpreted as kinds of a vertical evolution of social networks, where members share common interests in a particular domain or area, and exchange practical experiences to increase their knowledge and skills with respect to that specific field. In this paper we present some evaluation aspects of an experiment conducted within the framework of the European project UnderstandIT. The experiment involved the use of a CoP providing an educational program on Web2.0 Technologies for education for Vocational Education and Training teachers. The CoP was designed on the basis of the foundational Wenger’s concepts of domain, community and practice. In particular, we present a study of some social aspects of the CoP dynamics, basing our study on some evaluation metrics coming from the Social Network Analysis research area, i.e., using metrics such as betweenness, centrality, and closeness, in order to elicit useful relationships information. The experimental results confirm the goodness of the use of such approach for the elicitation of hidden information in the communicative network processes.


Social Network Analysis (SNA) Network Communication Process SEDA Project Supportive Care Education Mean Geodesic Distance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bastian, M., Heymann, S., Jacomy, M.: Gephi: An open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In: Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buysse, V., Sparkman, K.L., Wesley, P.W.: Communities of practice: connecting what we know with what we do. Except. Child. 69(3), 263–278 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calhoun, E.F.: How to Use Action Research in the Self-Renewing School. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Marsico, M., Limongelli, C., Sciarrone, F., Sterbini, A., Temperini, M.: Understandit: A community of practice of teachers for vet education. In: Proceedings of Webist 2014: 10th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies, pp. 338–345 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Marsico, M., Sterbini, A., Temperini, M.: The definition of a tunneling strategy between adaptive learning and reputation-based group activities. In: Proceedings of 11th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, ICALT, pp. 498–500 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Marsico, M., Sterbini, A., Temperini, M.: A strategy to join adaptive and reputation-based social-collaborative e-learning, through the zone of proximal development. Int. J. Distance Educ. Technol. 19(2), 105–121 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Marsico, M., Temperini, M.: Average effort and average mastery in the identification of the zone of proximal development. In: Proceedings of 17th IEEE International Conference on System Theory, Control and Computing, ICSTCC 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hummel, H.G.K.: Distance education and situated learning: paradox or partnership? Educ. Technol. 33(12), 11–22 (1993)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hussain, D.M.A.: Investigation of key-player problem in terrorist networks using bayes conditional probability. In: Furht, B. (ed.) Handbook of Social Network Technologies, pp. 523–547. Springer, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lave, J.: Situating learning in communities of practice. In: Resnick, L.B., Levine, J.M., Teasley, S.D. (eds.) Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, Chap. 4, pp. 63–82. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lave, J., Wenger, E.: Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Limongelli, C., Mosiello, G., Panzieri, S., Sciarrone, F.: Virtual industrial training: Joining innovative interfaces with plant modeling. In: Proceedings of ITHET 2012, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Limongelli, C., Sciarrone, F., Temperini, M., Vaste, G.: Lecomps5: A web-based learning system for course personalization and adaptation. In: Proceedings of IADIS 2008, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, July 22–25, 2008, pp. 325–332 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Limongelli, C., Sciarrone, F., Temperini, M., Vaste, G.: The lecomps5 framework for personalized web-based learning: a teacher’s satisfaction perspective. Comput. Hum. Behav. 27(4), 1310–1320 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Limongelli, C., Sciarrone, F., Vaste, G.: LS-Plan: an effective combination of dynamic courseware generation and learning styles in web-based education. In: Nejdl, W., Kay, J., Pu, P., Herder, E. (eds.) AH 2008. LNCS, vol. 5149, pp. 133–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Limongelli, C., Sciarrone, F., Vaste, G.: Personalized e-learning in moodle: the moodle-ls system. J. E-Learning Knowl. Soc. 7(1), 49–58 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marin, A., Wellman, B.: Social network analysis: an introduction. In: Carrington, P., Scott, J. (eds.) Handbook of Social Network Analysis. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nixon, S., Brown, S.: A community of practice in action: Seda as a learning community for educational developers in higher education. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 50(4), 357–365 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Prensky, M.: Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. Horiz. 9(5), 1–6 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sciarrone, F.: An extension of the q diversity metric for information processing in multiple classifier systems: a field evaluation. Int. J. Wavelets Multiresolut. Inf. Process. 11(6) (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Slaninova, K., Martinovic, J., Drazdilova, P., Obadi, G., Snasel, V.: Analysis of social networks extracted from log files. In: Furht, B. (ed.) Handbook of Social Network Technologies, pp. 115–146. Springer, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wasserman, S., Faust, K.: Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wenger, E.: Communities of practice: learning as a social system. Syst. think. 9(5), 2–3 (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wenger, E.: Communities of practice and social learning systems: the career of a concept. In: Blackmore, C. (ed.) Social Learning Systems and Communities of Practice, Chap. 11, pp. 179–198. The Open University, London (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang, M.: Social network analysis: History, concepts, and research. In: Furht, B. (ed.) Handbook of Social Network Technologies, pp. 3–21. Springer, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria De Marsico
    • 2
  • Carla Limongelli
    • 1
  • Filippo Sciarrone
    • 3
    Email author
  • Andrea Sterbini
    • 2
  • Marco Temperini
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of EngineeringRoma Tre UniversityRomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  3. 3.Department of Computer, Systems and Management EngineeringSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations