De Laat-2013-Visualizing Informal Professional

Americanhttp://abs.sagepub.
com/
Behavioral Scientist
Visualizing Informal Professional Development Networks: Building a Case for

Learning Analytics in the Workplace
Maarten de Laat and Bieke Schreurs
American Behavioral Scientist 2013 57: 1421 originally published online 11 March 2013
DOI: 10.1177/0002764213479364
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://abs.sagepub.com/content/57/10/1421
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for American Behavioral Scientist can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://abs.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://abs.sagepub.com/content/57/10/1421.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Sep 10, 2013

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Mar 11, 2013
What is This?
Downloaded from abs.sagepub.com at PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DE CHILE on July 15, 2014
479364
research-article2013
ABS571010.1177/0002764213479364American Behavioral ScientistDe Laat and Schreurs
Article
American Behavioral Scientist
57(10) 1421–1438
Visualizing Informal © 2013 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permissions:
Professional Development sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0002764213479364
Networks: Building a Case abs.sagepub.com
for Learning Analytics in the

Workplace
Maarten de Laat1 and Bieke Schreurs1
Abstract
Informal learning has become an important driver for professional development
and workplace learning. Yet, however powerful informal learning may be, there is
a problem when it comes to making it a real asset within organizations: Informal
learning activities are spontaneous and mostly invisible to others. The aim of this
study is to develop a method that helps raise awareness about these activities using
a learning analytics approach. This method concentrates on detecting and visualizing
informal professional social networks and finding ways in which their presence and
accessibility can be improved. This study shows that the presented methodology
is a promising research-driven intervention. With this methodology we can detect
multiple (isolated) networks in organizations, connect ideas, and facilitate value
creation. Using this approach, organizations can link with existing informal networks
of practice and unlock their potential for organizational learning by giving them a
voice and making their results more explicit within the organization.
Keywords
learning analytics, networked learning, informal learning, professional development,
workplace learning, organizational learning, human resource management
When thinking of professional development, organizations often rely on refresher

courses given by experts, in-service training, or personalized learning trajectories such
as coaching. These formal training opportunities for professionals represent just the tip
1LOOK, Open Universiteit of the Netherlands, Heerlen, Netherlands
Corresponding Author:
Maarten de Laat, LOOK, Open Universiteit of the Netherlands, Valkenburgerweg 177, 6419 AT Heerlen,
Netherlands.
Email: Maarten.delaat@ou.nl
1422 American Behavioral Scientist 57(10)
of the iceberg when imagining all forms of learning that take place given the chal-
lenges professionals face in their daily practice. Adopting a wider approach to profes-
sional development will optimize the potential for organizational learning (Argyris &
Schön, 1996; Dixon, 1994; Senge, 1990). More spontaneous and informal ways of
learning are largely overlooked in organizations, and thus the effects of informal learn-
ing remain invisible. Yet there is a large body of literature that convincingly shows that
these forms of spontaneous work-related learning are important drivers for ongoing
professional development and that such learning does not occur in isolation (Billett,
2001; Eraut, 2000; Lave, 2012; Marsick, 2001; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Research
shows that workplace learning is deeply connected with the work that people carry out
and their collaborations with colleagues and peers; professional development is effec-
tively realized and organized by professionals through their own social networks and
communities (Cross & Parker, 2004; Duguid, 2005; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012;
Weinberger, 2012; Wenger, 1998). Learning, working, and innovation are closely
linked (Billett, 2001; Marsick, 2001). Therefore, better understanding work practices
is critical to analyzing how learning takes place and how knowledge is created and
shared through a web of social relations maintained throughout one’s working life
(Wenger, Trayner, & De Laat, 2011).
However powerful informal learning may be, there is a difficulty when it comes to
utilizing it for professional development. Informal learning activities are mostly
implicit, ad hoc, spontaneous, and invisible to others (Cross & Parker, 2004). As such,
this problem presents an interesting challenge for the field of learning analytics (LA),
namely, finding ways to capture and analyze traces of (social) informal learning in
everyday life and work networks. LA does have the potential to make a great contribu-
tion to the area of professional development and lifelong learning, and its application
and method can be useful for human resource management, knowledge management,
and organizational learning. LA aligns with two principles that are crucial for enabling
professional development in organizations: (a) LA can help to shed light on unplanned
ongoing learning and professional development activities that are directly connected
with actual work practices, and (b) LA can enable a bottom-up culture of learning in
organizations that is driven by the real and urgent needs of professionals. This ongoing
learning contrasts sharply with the current dominant, management-driven training
approach that favors individual courses controlled by the corporate curriculum agenda,
relying on outside experts and outside sources of knowledge (Boud & Hager, 2012).
In this article we first outline our theoretical approach to professional development
and the importance of social networks. Second, we present our empirical research and
discuss how the findings inspired the development of LA tools to foster large-scale
networked professional development in organizations.
Professional Development
Boud and Hager (2012) build a strong case for rethinking continuing professional
development by changing its metaphor from acquisition and transfer to participation,
De Laat and Schreurs 1423
construction, and becoming, locating learning in professional practices in day-to-day

work. In their view,
Learning is a normal part of working, and indeed [of] most other social activities. It occurs
through practice in work settings from addressing the challenges and problems that arise.
Most learning takes place not through formalized activities, but through the exigencies of
practice with peers and others, drawing on expertise that is accessed in response to need.
Problem-solving in which participants tackle challenges which progressively extend their
existing capabilities and learn with and from each other appears to be common and frequent
form of naturalistic development. (p. 22)
Enabling this kind of learning means being in touch with the professionals around
you, building the networked connections you need to participate in constructive pro-
fessional dialogues about what it means to become a professional. The need for this
kind of learning is particularly acute for professionals in demanding jobs. Lohman
(2006) demonstrated that such professionals rely to a great extent on interactive learn-
ing activities to solve work-related problems. Although observable explicit knowledge
is easy to obtain through reading or training courses, informal social learning in the
workplace allows the development of deeper, tacit components of knowledge (Lane &
Lubatkin, 1998). Professionals may be informed about new approaches during train-
ing workshops; however, it is largely through their informal social networks that they
learn how to interpret, embrace, share, compile, contextualize, and sustain this new
knowledge (Baker-Doyle & Yoon, 2011). Hence, it is important to have an extended
and trustworthy network of professionals to rely on (Levin & Cross, 2004). Other
researchers have also reported that learning in networks is beneficial for professionals
(Goodyear, Banks, Hodgson, & McConnell, 2004; Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff,
1995; Lieberman & Wood, 2002; Senge, 1990) and a productive approach for profes-
sional development (Baker-Doyle & Yoon, 2011; Dresner & Worley, 2006).
Although research indicates a consensus on the benefits that networks have for
professional development, most of this research still describes what networks have to
offer in general terms, and not so much what people actually do within a network and
the strategies they develop to maintain their relationships. What is lacking is a grounded
empirical approach describing networked learning behavior, detailing the qualities
involved (De Laat, 2012). Information science and organization science both use
social network analysis to find out how information is being shared effectively within
networks. The focus is often on network indicators, such as density and degree, to
indicate how well people are connected within their networks and how information
flows from person to person. These statistics tell us a lot about how information is
shared through network relationships, but this says little or nothing about how and
what is being learned. In terms of networked learning, it is difficult to hypothesize
about the impact that networked relations have. In some cases, a remark by a single
connection far away is enough to change your world; in other cases, it might seem that
a tight group of eight people might be needed to solve a particular problem. It is clear
that networked relationships are an integrated aspect of learning. The question, how-
ever, is, what makes a learning connection?
Networked Learning
Networked learning is an emerging perspective that aims to understand learning pro-
cesses by asking how people develop and maintain a web of social relations for their
learning and professional development (Goodyear et al., 2004; Haythornthwaite & De
Laat, 2011; Steeples & Jones, 2002; Thompson et al., 2013). Networked learning
focuses on the diversity of social relationships people develop, what strategies they
use to maintain them, and the value this creates for learning. Both weak relationships
with acquaintances and strong connections such as long-lasting friendships with peers
and community memberships are important for professional development. Granovetter
(1973) demonstrated that weak relationships are important for gaining access to new
perspectives and knowledge; strong relationships are needed to deepen and embed
knowledge that is closely related to day-to-day shared practice, as well as increasing
commitment to joint activities.
Research on communities of practice shows how individual members develop
strong, long-lasting social relationships and shared knowledge and norms that facili-
tate their shared practice and domain. However, the emergence and cultivation of com-
munities is a difficult process (Bruckman & Jensen, 2002). Successful communities
may turn their attention inward, preserving and deepening group knowledge, but fail
to capture new information and remain innovative. A strong core may dissuade partici-
pation by those outside the central core or fail to provide an environment where new-
comers can come to understand norms and practices through legitimate peripheral
participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Communities of practice are often formed to
place an emphasis on strong relationships, engendering a certain closeness and unity
of purpose (Jones, Ferreday, & Hodgson, 2008). A networked perspective encom-
passes more and different relations, looking at the diversity of social relationships
people maintain and the diversity of relationships (weak to strong) that make up com-
munities and other forms of social networked structures. Therefore, networked learn-
ing investigates the number and range of contacts one has and the intention in which
they are being used for learning. This can include talking with one or more colleagues
in the hallway or in the coffee shop, sending an email, using Skype or a phone with a
few peers around the world, or sharing your experience in one or more online
communities.
Learning Analytics
Where networked learning helps to understand the importance of “learning relation-
ships” for professional development, LA aims to develop tools to raise awareness
about the presence of learning activities and processes and to make such processes
available for analysis. LA can be applied to harvest and analyze information about
learner activities with a focus on learner behavior in the frame of formal learning
activities, such as completing assignments and taking exams, and more informal set-
tings, such as posts on discussion forums and online social interactions (Buckingham
Shum & Ferguson, 2011; Siemens, 2010).
To date, much of the LA literature has been concerned with learning in educational
settings based on online interactions in virtual learning environments (VLEs, also
known as learning management systems; see Buckingham Shum, Gašević, & Ferguson,
2012). In this article we extend this focus by proposing an LA methodology based on
analyzing traces of learning in the area of professional development and lifelong learn-
ing. The research question addressed in this article is twofold. First, can we develop an
approach to professional development that is connected with the day-to-day informal
networked learning activities in the workplace? Second, can these insights provide
directions for developing scalable automated LA tools that facilitate the establishment
of informal networks to better utilize their learning potential?
Empirical Base Study

In our research we examine informal learning networks in the workplace and their
influence on professional development. We have worked with research projects in the
education sector, focusing on teacher professional development. When interviewing
school leaders, we have found that most of these managers have no or limited insight
into what teachers learn in their day-to-day practice. This makes it difficult to raise
awareness about the importance of informal learning. In our approach to developing
an LA framework, we were inspired by the work of Homan (2006) to facilitate infor-
mal professional development networks. Homan found that successful organizational
change and innovation are dependent on the support and actions of what he calls the
informal organization. This refers to the power bases maintained by informal networks
within the organization. Homan developed a research methodology, called change
mirror, to detect these informal networks and to mirror to the organization their voices
and opinions. As a first step, the method creates awareness about the existence of these
informal networks using social network analysis (SNA). Second, the method is used
to elicit what these networks are about by using a group discussion software. Combining
the data collected during these two steps greatly facilitates the understanding of (resis-
tance to) change processes in organizations.
Method
Procedure
To evaluate the change mirror approach from Homan (2006), we applied it in the con-
text of networked learning in organizations to see how it fits with our aim to detect
informal professional development networks. To do this, we combined Homan’s
change mirror approach with a multimethod research design for studying networked
Figure 1. Multimethod research framework for studying networked learning.

Source: De Laat (2006).
learning (De Laat, 2006). The aim of this is to paint a more complete picture of net-
worked learning processes in a naturalistic setting (Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, &
Allen, 1993). This multimethod research framework (see Figure 1) triangulates SNA
to find out “who is talking to whom,” content analysis (CA) to find out “what they are
talking about,” and contextual analysis (CxA), focusing on the context of the organiza-
tion the participants are working in to find out “why they are talking as they do.”
Together with Homan’s (2006) change mirror, this three-step research design
resulted:
Step 1—SNA: This is aimed at finding out who is talking to whom with respect to a
particular problem. This step visualizes existing informal networks where profes-
sionals collaborate on a certain problem and shows the extent to which they are (or
are not) connected throughout the entire organization. This is done using an online
survey.
Step 2—CA: The next step is aimed at finding out what these networks are talking
about and what their ideas and thoughts on this problem are. This is done with a
group discussion tool called Synthetron. All participants take part in a synchronous
online discussion, where they can share and talk about their ideas and experiences
with this work-related problem. The tool makes the entire discussion as well as
logged data available for analysis.
Step 3—CxA: This step is aimed at finding out how and why these networks behave as
they do in their informal setting. The research during this step is based on focus
group interviews that help, for example, to interpret the impact particular networks
may have on the organization and put a weight on the “voices” that reside in these
networks.
Research Team
Our research methodology stresses the importance of working with a research team.
To help understand the collected data, we set up a pseudo–research team within the
school or organization. This research team acts as a sparring partner that helps to inter-
pret our findings and develop plans for future steps. This team consists of teachers,
school leaders, and administrators. The purpose of this research team is to form a
representative microcosm of the entire organization. In this way the data collected dur-
ing the three steps can be interpreted and understood in their own naturalistic setting.
The researcher relies on this research team for understanding what is said in which
network (Steps 2 and 3).
Participants
A large school district of 70 schools in the Netherlands, cooperating together under the
umbrella of a joint academy for professional development, participated in this study.
The academy is a fusion of four different groups of schools, each of a particular
denomination. This academy tries to facilitate professional development between the
participating schools. Their work is aimed at bringing available expertise together and
fostering networks where teachers can work and learn together on emerging issues and
work-related problems. A problem common in this study was that all these schools
were concerned with the implementation in their curriculum of societal internships for
their students. This is a totally new task for each of the schools, which means they have
to develop a vision of what these societal internships are, develop relationships with
organizations in the region where the students can go for their internships, and develop
meaningful tasks and procedures to streamline these activities. Within each school, at
least one teacher is assigned to the task of establishing these internships. Since there is
no prior history on this innovation, the teachers are faced with developing new knowl-
edge and processes for themselves. These teachers were targeted to take part in this
study to find out to what extent they had developed networks within the school district
to collaboratively resolve the problem.
Figure 2. Communication networks found in the joint academy (based on empirical data).
Findings
Step 1—SNA: Detecting Networks
The online survey (returned by 52 participants) produced data about the extent to which
the school teachers were connected among each other based on the collaborations they
developed on the work-related problem relating to the development of societal intern-
ships. On this survey, respondents were asked to select the names of their colleagues
within the school district with whom they had meaningful conversations on the issue of
developing societal internships. These conversations could mean sharing information
or experiences, brainstorming about the issue, and/or developing some plan, action, or
other activity together. Based on this relational data set, an adjacent matrix was created
and used to conduct SNA with UCINET and draw the network visualizations.
Figure 2 shows the communication networks that emerged from this initial survey.
The first observation is that the visualization clearly shows the existence of several
(isolated) networks talking about this innovation. The different node shapes in the
figure refer to the four different school denominations, easily identified as four differ-
ent main groups in the visualization. The triangles that are pointing down refer to
external people who are involved in the networks but not working at one of the schools
in question. It is clear from the links in the networks that the people are more or less
connected to members of their own group (see the links between similar node shapes).
Little or no connections between the different node shapes are found.
A second observation is that within the groups there are also multiple isolated net-
works with few connections between them. Further analysis by the research team
found that these small networks refer to specific school locations in which several
teachers talk together about the innovation. From this, we can conclude that the teach-
ers mostly discuss the problem with colleagues within their own schools and have only
limited discussion with colleagues from within their own denomination. Some partici-
pants within the small networks seem to take a central position, and others act as
bridges connecting networks. Further analysis showed that in most cases these bridg-
ing nodes were school directors or teachers within the school who had a more flexible
work agenda. Contact between these individuals was not limited to teaching hours,
and thus they moved more freely between schools for meetings.
Step 2—CA: Synthetron Group Discussion

A total of 50 teachers logged on to the synchronous Synthetron group discussion to
talk about what mattered to them with respect to the problem at hand. The central
focus of the Synthetron discussion was to find out what was most urgent for them to
learn from each other and what materials they could share to avoid reinventing the
wheel several times within the organization. Thus, the main aim of the discussion was
to find out what stage they had reached in implementing these societal internships in
their own schools, to what extent they would like to collaborate between schools
within their joint academy, and what they would like these collaborations to be about.
Based on the emergent text analysis from the Synthetron discussion and log files, the
discussion proved to be very useful for gaining insight into the practice and needs of
individual teachers concerned with developing these internships. Teachers explored
issues such as managerial support, time pressure, quality, and experience. Never before
had there been a collaborative conversation among the teachers at this scale about this
issue, and being able to have a voice on this matter was valued by the participants.
Recognizing shared concerns was of great value, as was identifying materials produced
to make this innovation work, especially because there seemed to be quite a bit of over-
lap in the individual experiences. When the question was asked during the Synthetron
discussion if they would like to start working together for the purposes of producing
and sharing resources, there was a much agreement among the teachers. The discussion
went on to explore concrete ideas (stories, good practices, procedures, standard forms,
policy documents, excursions, etc.) that they would like to share or develop further. The
main reason for working together, according to the participants, was to learn from each
other and to avoid reinventing the wheel and saving time and effort.
Step 3—CxA: Data Triangulation

When combining the results of the online survey and the Synthetron discussion with
the input from the research teams, we can build a clear picture of the potential for
Figure 3. Key individuals across networks found in the joint academy (based on empirical
data).
networks to start working together or share information and resources. In Figure 3 we

have enlarged the nodes in the networks of “isolated” teachers who indicated a desire
for collaboration on the topics mentioned during the Synthetron discussion. These key
individuals noted that it is important to share materials and experiences to help col-
leagues from their joint academy who are dealing with the same problem of develop-
ing these internships. It is particularly interesting in Figure 3 to see that these key
individuals seem to be relatively well dispersed across the isolated networks as well as
across the different groups that are part of this joint academy.
The results indicate that after detecting the informal networks (Step 1), there is
potential interest in connecting these networks (Steps 2 and 3). The key figures in
these networks could be seen as latent ties (Haythornthwaite, 2002) bridging the gap
between currently unconnected networks within the organization. Being able to build
connections among these spontaneous informal learning networks will boost the
exchange of knowledge and productive learning within the entire organization.
Although the research team believed in the potential of these informal professional
development networks, they indicated that the process of visualization and the attempt
to bring these networks closer together was time-consuming. They also found that
their work as a member of the research team as well as their reasons for doing it were
often misunderstood by local management in the participating schools. In conversa-
tions with local management, they found that school leaders found it difficult to under-
stand what informal networks are and how they facilitate professional development.
The added value of these informal networks for developing societal internships was
not recognized, and therefore the school leaders were not going to support this initia-
tive by giving the network members the space they needed to allow further growth and
set up collaborations among themselves. As a consequence, the members of the
research team did not see it as their role to further facilitate the development of these
networks within the organization.
Implications for LA Design

This study shows that the SNA, CA, and CxA approach is a useful research-driven
intervention method to shed light on informal networked learning in large organiza-
tions. With this methodology, we can detect multiple (isolated) networks in the orga-
nization, connect ideas, and foster collaboration beyond existing boundaries. It allows
organizations to link into existing informal professional development networks,
unlock their potential for organizational learning by raising their profile, show their
existence, and make their results more explicit within the organization. This way we
can overcome some of the traditional weaknesses of informal learning expressed in the
problem statement described in the introduction. In this article we argued that many
professionals are learning informally and that this is facilitated by networked relation-
ships. The research described above shows that this is true, but it also shows that this
approach is time-consuming and costly because of the involvement of a pseudo–
research team that engaged in helping interpret and contextualize findings.
Relying on labor-intensive research makes it difficult to realize the potential of LA
when it comes to providing real-time automated insights on large-scale systems in
which multiple professional development networks are operating on a variety of work-
related problems. The idea behind LA is to produce information about learning activi-
ties to the user in much the same way the instrument panel of a car provides information
about the current state of the car. Applying this metaphor to our study and the findings
it produced, we found it necessary to improve our approach. The major recommenda-
tions are as follows:
Improve data collection to detect informal networks because the online SNA surveys
collect data only once and depend on participants’ ability to recall all the networked
relationships that were involved.
Automate data collection to speed up the SNA process because collating survey data
into SNA-adjacent matrixes is labor intensive. Using a tool that will structure the
data collection method will improve the ability to process data efficiently.
Allow the data collection to represent multiple problems because the visualization of one
particular problem has limited scope and reduces its application for organizations.
Provide instant feedback to the users because the current approach takes time to ana-
lyze. Using automated LA tools that are web-based, occur in real time, and rely on
user-generated data can provide network visualizations automatically.
Allow the visualizations to become dynamic and up-to-date. Through LA the dynamic
development of these networks can be shown, keeping professionals in touch with
those who are currently involved in collaborating on real and urgent problems in
the workplace.
Based on these suggestions, we developed the Network Awareness Tool (NAT; De

Laat & Schreurs, 2011) as a way to improve and extend the LA approach introduced
in our base study. NAT is an online tool that generates social network visualizations
based on learning activities that professionals are engaged in. These activities are cen-
tralized on real and urgent problems in the workplace that require learning relation-
ships with colleagues or experts they know. The tool combines three important streams
of information: (a) it produces an overview of current issues or problems that profes-
sionals are actively working on; (b) for each of these issues, it generates a network
visualization based on existing professional relationships; and (c) it shows in which
organizations or subdivisions within an organization these network members are
located. In sum, this tool acts as a social knowledge browser where people can find
learning ties and develop learning partnerships in networks based on issues that truly
matter to them. (For a demonstration, see www.look.ou.nl/nib username gast01/pass-
word gast01)
In short, NAT works as follows. Users can register and create a profile page, with a
focus on their work and area of expertise (see Figure 4). Then users can describe and
tag problems that are the object of their learning activities and add the people they col-
laborate with on each of these problems. Users can also explore existing problems
already mentioned by others and link themselves to them.
Based on the information brought together in this tool, LA helps users to develop
an overview of existing informal networks in the entire organization, centralized on
urgent and real problems. Figure 5 shows that users can navigate a tag cloud of all
existing problems (in the shaded column on the right). After selected a problem of
interest (e.g., “JB-RT,” presented in Figure 5), they can see the network around that
problem pictured in the middle section of the screen. This allows them to explore the
members of that particular network, and they can see in which organization or subdivi-
sion these people work.
Users can click on the nodes (representing the individual network members) in the
network visualization to explore all the relationships this particular person has devel-
oped. The lower-left section of the screen (see Figure 5) provides a list of the connec-
tions and themes in which the selected person is an active learner. Here one can
immediately see which problems this person is working on. This information provides
an indication of his or her areas of expertise. Based on the connections visualized, one
can also see how well connected this person is within and between participating orga-
nizations. The level of connectivity indicates the extent to which this person has access
to new information and is collaborating with his or her peers on constructing new
knowledge on particular issues.
Figure 4. Example of the Network Awareness Tool profile page.
The graphical representation offered by NAT can be dynamically explored. This

makes it easy to switch between network visualizations of particular people and to see
networks on certain work-related topics to get an indication of who and which organi-
zations (or subdivisions) are involved. NAT raises the awareness of people’s participa-
tion in current issues and their connectivity with their peers. As such, NAT shows the
presence of collaborative networks and how knowledge and expertise flow between
informal learning networks within the organization. As such, this tool becomes a
knowledge browser allowing professionals to find peers they can connect with when
they encounter particular problems during their work.
Discussion
In this article we have described professional development as part of day-to-day work
informed by metaphors that see participation, constructing, and becoming as a way of
Figure 5. Screenshot of the instant visualization accessible for the users.
learning. This approach to learning encourages participation (Boud & Hager, 2012)
where learning is seen as situated, embedded, and maintained in the daily culture of
(shared) practices and professional standards (Lave & Wenger, 1991). These practices
concern not only the practice of your own classroom or work setting. Participation also
means involvement with a larger, perhaps even global landscape of connected net-
works of practice (Teigland, 2003). This perspective gives rise to a more bottom-up,
self-governing culture of learning in organizations where informal networks of col-
leagues share experiences, knowledge, and contacts, providing each other with access
to new and alternative resources. Our empirical case study not only revealed the exis-
tence of professional development networks surrounding a given problem (developing
societal internships) but also showed the limited extent to which these networks are
connected and encouraged to grow. Innovative professional development policies can
increase opportunities for professionals to share their expertise, learn from their peers,
and collaborate on real-world projects (Vrasidas & Glass, 2004). However, this is
dependent on raising awareness about the existence of these informal networks and an
appreciation of their value (Wenger et al., 2011).
Based on our research approach combining SNA, CA, and CxA, we developed an
LA-based tool, NAT, that enables us to combine and present an overview of work-
related problems that professionals are working on in various social networks. Based
on the descriptions and tags that people provide on what these problems are about
(CA), the tool provides insight into the learning needs and the value it creates. SNA
helps to analyze connectivity among peers and to find learning partnerships on issues
that matter. LA can help to raise awareness about informal learning in organizations,
but this information says very little about how to use this information.
This is why the third step in our approach (CxA) is so important. Information about
networks becomes meaningful in the context in which they act. Understanding more
about how they operate and the space and encouragement they are given to exist helps
professionals to make decisions about joining them and put energy into developing
their capability. There needs to be a culture in the organization that facilitates and
promotes day-to-day learning and professional development in actual practice (Büchel
& Raub, 2002). This requires a management approach that is in touch with the learning
that happens informally (Boud & Hager, 2012) and one that has a greater appreciation
of networked activity in connection with learning and development (Cross & Parker,
2004; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012; Lohman, 2006; Weinberger, 2012). NAT and LA
that help reflect day-to-day learning in the workplace can make an important contribu-
tion to reaching that goal.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
References
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II. Theory, method, and practice.
New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.
Baker-Doyle, K. J., & Yoon, S. A. (2011). In search of practitioner-based social capital: A
social network analysis tool for understanding and facilitating teacher collaboration in
a US-based STEM professional development program. Professional Development in
Education, 37(1), 75-93.
Billett, S. (2001). Learning through work: Workplace affordances and individual engagement.
Journal of Workplace Learning, 13(5), 209-214.
Boud, D., & Hager, P. (2012). Re-thinking continuing professional development through chang-
ing metaphors and location in professional practices. Studies in Continuing Education,
34(1), 17-30.
Bruckman, A., & Jensen, C. (2002). The mystery of the death of Mediamoo: Seven years of
evolution of an online community. In K. A. Renninger, & W. Shumar (Eds.), Building
virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 21-33). Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Büchel, B., & Raub, S. (2002). Building knowledge-creating value networks. European
Management Journal, 20(6), 587-596.
Buckingham Shum, S., & Ferguson, R. (2011). Social learning analytics (Tech. Rep. No. KMI-
11-01). Milton Keynes, UK: Open University, Knowledge Media Institute. Retrieved from
http://kmi.open.ac.uk/publications/pdf/kmi-11-01.pdf
Buckingham Shum, S., Gašević, D., & Ferguson, R. (Eds.). (2012). Proceedings of the 2nd
International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK 2012). Retrieved
from http://portalparts.acm.org
Cross, R., & Parker, A. (2004). The hidden power of social networks. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School.
De Laat, M. (2006). Networked learning. Apeldoorn, Netherlands: Politieacademie.
De Laat, M. (2012). Enabling professional development networks: How connected are you?
Heerlen: Open Universiteit of the Netherlands, LOOK.
De Laat, M., & Schreurs, B. (2011). Network Awareness Tool: social learning browser for visu-
alizing, analysing and managing social networks. Heerlen, Netherlands: Open Universiteit,
Ruud de Moor Centrum.
Dixon, N. (1994). The organizational learning cycle: How we can learn collectively. London,
UK: McGraw-Hill.
Dresner, M., & Worley, E. (2006). Teacher research experiences, partnerships with scientists,
and teacher networks sustaining factors from professional development, Journal of Science
Teacher Education, 17(1), 1-14.
Duguid, P. (2005). The art of knowing: Social and tacit dimensions of knowledge and the limits
of the community of practice. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 113-136.
Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B., & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry:
A guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Goodyear, P., Banks, S., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (2004). Advances in research on net-
worked learning. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-
1380.
Harasim, L., Hiltz, R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to
teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every
school. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Strong, weak and latent ties and the impact of new media.
Information Society, 18, 385-401.
Haythornthwaite, C., & De Laat, M. (2011). Social network informed design for learning with
educational technology. In A. D. Olofsson., & J. O. Lindberg (Eds.), Informed design of
educational technologies in higher education: Enhanced learning and teaching (pp. 352-
374). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Homan, T. (2006). Wolkenridders. Over de binnenkant van organisatieverandering [Cloud
surfers: The inside story of organizational change]. Heerlen: Open University of the
Netherlands.
Jones, C., Ferreday, D., & Hodgson, V. (2008). Networked learning a relational approach—
Weak and strong ties. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 90-102.
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learn-
ing. Strategic Management Journal, 19(50), 461-477.
Lave, J. (2012). Changing practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(2), 156-171.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning—Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of
trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490.
Lieberman, A., & Wood, D. (2002). From network learning to classroom teaching. Journal of
Educational Change, 3, 315-337.
Lohman, M. C. (2006). Factors influencing teachers’ engagement in informal learning activi-
ties. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(3), 141-156.
Marsick, V. J. (2001, January). Informal strategic learning in the workplace. Paper presented at
the Conference on HRD Research and Practice, Enschede, Netherlands.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese compa-
nies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New
York, NY: Doubleday Currency.
Siemens, G. (2010). What are learning analytics? Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/
blog/2010/08/25/what-are-learning-analytics/
Steeples, C., & Jones, C. (Eds.). (2002). Networked learning: perspectives and issues. London,
UK: Springer.
Teigland, R. (2003). Knowledge networking: Structure and performance in network of practice.
Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm School of Economics, Institute of International Business.
Thompson, K., Ashe, D., Carvalho, L., Goodyear, P., Kelly, N., & & Parisio, M. (2013).
Processing and visualizing data in complex learning environments. American Behavioral
Scientist.
Vrasidas, C., & Glass, G. V. (Eds.). (2004). Current perspectives in applied information tech-
nologies: Online professional development for teachers. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Weinberger, D. (2012). Too big to know: Rethinking knowledge now that the facts aren’t the
facts, experts are everywhere, and the smartest person in the room. New York, NY: Basic
Books.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & De Laat, M. F. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation
in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Heerlen, Netherlands: Ruud de
Moor Centrum, Open Universiteit. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/documents/
Wenger_Trayner_DeLaat_Value_creation.pdf
Author Biographies
Maarten de Laat is full professor at LOOK, a research center on teacher professional develop-
ment, at the Open Universiteit of the Netherlands. He is director of the Social and Networked
Learning research program, which concentrates on exploring social learning strategies and net-
worked learning relationships that facilitate professional development in the workplace. His
research is focused on informal learning in the workplace, lifelong learning, professional devel-
opment, and knowledge creation through (online) social networks and communities and the
impact technology, learning analytics, and social design have on the way these networks and
communities work, learn, and create value. He is cochair of the International Networked
Learning Conference as well as cochair of the minitrack on Learning Analytics & Networked
Learning at the HICSS conference and a member of the steering committee of SoLAR (Society
for Learning Analytics Research).
Bieke Schreurs is a doctoral student and project coordinator at LOOK, a research center on
teacher professional development, at the Open Universiteit of the Netherlands. Her research
focuses on the capital of networked learning in which she studies informal learning networks in
the workplace. She also does research on implementing measures to streamline innovations in
schools. She is involved in projects to support primary and secondary schools to stimulate the
professional development of teachers. Due to her former work experience at EuroPACE and the
K.U. Leuven, she is a skilled project coordinator with 5 years of experience in European proj-
ects in the area of ICT-enhanced learning, virtual campuses, and e-learning. She also organized
and delivered a range of training activities related to the use of ICT in education. She has deliv-
ered numerous lectures and presentations at renowned national and international conferences
and events.

De Laat-2013-Visualizing Informal Professional

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

De Laat-2013-Visualizing Informal Professional

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

De Laat-2013-Visualizing Informal Professional

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Americanhttp://abs.sagepub.

Visualizing Informal Professional Development Networks: Building a Case for

The online version of this article can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

>> Version of Record - Sep 10, 2013

for Learning Analytics in the

Maarten de Laat1 and Bieke Schreurs1

When thinking of professional development, organizations often rely on refresher

1LOOK, Open Universiteit of the Netherlands, Heerlen, Netherlands

construction, and becoming, locating learning in professional practices in day-to-day

Empirical Base Study

Figure 1. Multimethod research framework for studying networked learning.

Step 2—CA: Synthetron Group Discussion

Step 3—CxA: Data Triangulation

networks to start working together or share information and resources. In Figure 3 we

Implications for LA Design

Based on these suggestions, we developed the Network Awareness Tool (NAT; De

Figure 4. Example of the Network Awareness Tool profile page.

The graphical representation offered by NAT can be dynamically explored. This

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

You might also like