Skip to content
1981
Volume 14, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 2040-4689
  • E-ISSN: 2040-4697

Abstract

This study examines why people choose to participate in online and face-to-face craft groups and seeks to understand how the mode of participation impacts individual experience and meaning making. Data from eight semi-structured interviews, text analysis of 345 social media posts, and participant observation of four face-to-face craft group meet-ups are synthesized, resulting in identification of social, technical and expressive meanings that underpin motivation to participate in both online and physical groups. These three categories expand on previous research categorizing motivation and meanings related to physical craft groups, by considering the range of asynchronous making-related online activities. The processes associated with sharing and acquiring knowledge and skills in online and physical craft groups were compared, with online groups being considered more conducive to the sharing of explicit or ‘hard’ knowledge, and physical groups being more suited to the sharing of tacit or ‘soft’ knowledge.

© 2023 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00107_1
2023-11-28
2026-04-21

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atkinson, P. (2007), Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 3rd ed., London: Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203944769.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Chang, H. (2008), Autoethnography as Method, Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Charmaz, K. (2014), Constructing Grounded Theory, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Corbin, J. M. and Strauss, A. L. (2008), Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 3rd ed., n.p.: Sage Publications, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Dicicco-Bloom, B. and Crabtree, B. F. (2006), ‘The qualitative research interview’, Medical Education, 40:4, pp. 314–21, https://doi.org/0.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Dickie, V. A. (2003), ‘The role of learning in quilt making’, Journal of Occupational Science, 10:3, pp. 120–29, https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2003.9686519.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Dissanayake, E. (1995), ‘The pleasure and meaning of making’, American Craft, 55:2, pp. 40–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Engeström, Y. (1999), ‘Activity theory and individual and social transformation’, in Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen and R.-L. Punamäki-Gitai (eds), Perspectives on Activity Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–38.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Dimitriadis, Y. and Scobie, G. (2014), ‘Failure and resilience at boundaries: The emotional process of identity work’, in E. Wenger-Trayner, M. Fenton-O’Creevy, S. Hutchinson, C. Kubiak and B. Wenger-Trayner (eds), Learning in Landscapes of Practice Boundaries, Identity, and Knowledgeability in Practice-Based Learning, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 33–42, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315777122.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Fields, C. D. (2014), ‘Not your grandma’s knitting: The role of identity processes in the transformation of cultural practices’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 77:2, pp. 150–65, https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272514523624.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gibson, M. (2020), ‘Making meaning: Informal craft communities as sites of learning and identity development’, doctoral thesis, Dunedin: University of Otago.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Jadin, T., Gnambs, T. and Batinic, B. (2013), ‘Personality traits and knowledge sharing in online communities’, Computers in Human Behavior, 29:1, pp. 210–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.08.007.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Johnson, C. M. (2001), ‘A survey of current research on online communities of practice’, Internet and Higher Education, 4:1, pp. 45–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(01)00047-1.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Johnson, J. S. and Wilson, L. (2005), ‘“It says you really care”: Motivational factors of contemporary female handcrafters’, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 23:2, pp. 115–30, https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X0502300205.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Kimble, C. and Hildreth, P. (2005), ‘Dualities, distributed communities of practice and knowledge management’, Journal of Knowledge Management, 9:4, pp. 102–13, https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270510610369.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., Oeberst, A. and Cress, U. (2015), ‘Learning and collective knowledge construction with social media: A process-oriented perspective’, Educational Psychologist, 50:2, pp. 120–37, https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1036273.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kimmerle, J., Thiel, A., Gerbing, K.-K., Bientzle, M., Halatchliyski, I. and Cress, U. (2013), ‘Knowledge construction in an outsider community: Extending the communities of practice concept’, Computers in Human Behavior, 29:3, p. 1078, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.010.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Knowles, M. S. (2015), The Adult Learner: The Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 8th ed., New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Korn, P. (2015), Why We Make Things and Why It Matters: The Education of a Craftsman, Boston, MA: David R Godine.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Kouhia, A. (2012), ‘Categorizing the meanings of craft: A multi-perspectival framework for eight interrelated meaning categories’, Techne Series: Research in Sloyd Education and Craft Science A, 19:1, pp. 25–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Labaree, R. V. (2002), ‘The risk of “going observationalist”: Negotiating the hidden dilemmas of being an insider participant observer’, Qualitative Research, 2:1, pp. 97–122, https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794102002001641.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Lambropoulos, N. and Zaphiris, P. (2006), User-Centered Design of Online Learning Communities, IGI Global, London: Information Science Publishing, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-358-6.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991), Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, New York: Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Livingstone, D. W. (2007), ‘Re-exploring the icebergs of adult learning: Comparative findings of the 1998 and 2004 Canadian surveys of formal and informal learning practices’, Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 20:2, pp. 1–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Maidment, J. and Macfarlane, S. (2009), ‘Craft groups: Sites of friendship, empowerment, belonging and learning for older women’, Groupwork, 19:1, pp. 10–25, https://doi.org/10.1921/095182409X471802.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Mayne, A. (2016), ‘Feeling lonely, feeling connected: Amateur knit and crochet makers online’, Craft Research, 7:1, pp. 11–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. McLure Wasko, M. and Faraj, S. (2000), ‘“It is what one does”: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice’, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9:2&3, pp. 155–73, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-8687(00)00045-7.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Moreno, M. A., Goniu, N., Moreno, P. S. and Diekema, D. (2013), ‘Ethics of social media research: Common concerns and practical considerations’, Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 16:9, pp. 708–13, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0334.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. OECD (n.d.), ‘Recognition of non-formal and informal learning: Home’, https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/recognitionofnon-formalandinformallearning-home.htm. Accessed 16 April 2023.
  30. Patton, M. Q. (2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Preece, J. and Maloney-Krichmar, D. (2005), ‘Online communities: Design, theory, and practice’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10:4, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00264.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Scribner, S. and Cole, M. (1973), ‘Cognitive consequences of formal and informal education: New accommodations are needed between school-based learning and learning experiences of everyday life’, Science, 182:4112, p. 553.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Sloan, L. and Quan-Haase, A. (2017), The Sage Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Stetsenko, A. (2012), ‘Personhood: An activist project of historical becoming through collaborative pursuits of social transformation’, New Ideas in Psychology, 30:1, pp. 144–53, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.11.008.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Stetsenko, A. and Arievitch, I. (2004), ‘The self in cultural-historical activity theory: Reclaiming the unity of social and individual dimensions of human development’, Theory & Psychology, 14:4, pp. 475–503, https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354304044921.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Thomas, D. R. (2006), ‘A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data’, American Journal of Evaluation, 27:2, pp. 237–46, https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Thornberg, R. and Charmaz, K. (2014), ‘Grounded theory and theoretical coding’, in U. Flick (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis, London: SAGE Publications Ltd., pp. 153–70, https://methods.sagepub.com/book/the-sage-handbook-of-qualitative-data-analysis. Accessed 16 April 2023.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Townsend, L. and Wallace, C. (2016), Social Media Research: A Guide to Ethics, Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen, https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_487729_smxx.pdf. Accessed 10 March 2023.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Warner, L. C. (2018), ‘Uncovering everyday learning and teaching within the quilting community of Aotearoa New Zealand’, doctoral thesis, Palmerston North: Massey University.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Wenger, E. (1998), Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Wertsch, J. V. (1994), ‘The primacy of mediated action in sociocultural studies’, Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1:4, pp. 202–08, https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039409524672.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00107_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): communities of practice; craft; explicit knowledge; informal learning; meaning making; tacit knowledge

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test