Book Notes & Thoughts: Communities of Practice, Part II

CoP_Design

Part II took me a lot longer to read than the reading schedule I had laid out for myself in June. I got bogged down reading the epilogue and life just kept getting in the way!

Wenger uses great examples to illustrate his concepts throughout, whether from his vignettes about the claims processors or everyday life, but the final chapter on education really brought everything together for me with the concepts coalescing around a concrete application. When you view legacy schools through this lens, it is clear how they are lacking possibilities for mutual engagement, material to support imagination, and participatory alignment. (p.183) In contrast, I see many positive connections with the personalized learning environments I have observed in Wisconsin, places where students define their trajectories, explore their identities, and participate in a communities of learning. “Indeed, the mutuality of engagement is a mutuality of learning.” (p.277)

What I liked about the identity component of communities of practice (CoP) is that it explains a lot of my observations and gives them a coherent nature. For example, I worked at a school where my work spanned multiple communities: the middle school teacher, the technology department, the boarding program, and sometimes all-school committees. I could feel my behavior shift in each situation, everything from how I participated in meetings to how I dressed. I negotiated a multimembership identity (and loved it) and brokered many conversations across these communities. (p.255) I could see too how I carried ideas from one to the other, where the technology department meetings almost served as an innovation zone where we shared what happened in other divisions and brought those back to ours. “Boundaries are inevitable and useful. They define a texture for engaged identities, not vague identities that float at the level of an abstract, unfathomable organization.” (p.254)
The CoP theory definitely doesn’t simplify organizations and interactions, but it does present compelling mechanisms for why things are and at many points it resonated with my personal experiences:

  • Mutuality of engagement “We become who we are by being able to play a part in the relations of engagement that constitute our community.” (p.152) = mechanism for assimilation
  • “Through engagement, participants do not necessarily understand the world, each other’s experience, or their shared enterprise more accurately. Mutual engagement merely creates a shared reality in which to act and construct an identity.” (p.177) = mechanism for how creating or problem solving together creates relationships between people
  • “Though engagement, imagination, and alignment are distinct modes of belonging, they are not mutually exclusive. A given community can be constituted by all three in various proportions, and the variety of these combinations results in communities with distinct qualities. Given a community, one might wonder what the possibilities for mutual engagement are, what material supports imagination, and how alignment is secured.” (p.182-183) = mechanisms of community formation
  • “Similarly, ‘going along’ – through willing allegiance or mere submission – is a form of identification because it shapes the way we experience our own power and thus contributes to defining our identity.” (p.196) This was absolutely my experience at my first Wisconsin hockey game – when a particular song came on (I think it was Roll Out the Barrel), everyone stood up and started doing a series of dance motions along with the music. I had no idea what they were doing and lamely tried to follow, but I was completely caught off guard. “All this alignment of energy creates a way of taking part in something big” (p.196) = mechanism for how we get swept up into something like rooting for college athletics
  • “Focusing on an institutionalized curriculum without issues of identity thus runs the risk of serving only those who already have an identity of participation with respect to the material in other contexts.” (p.269) “In fact, for many students, school presents a choice between a meaningful identity and learning – a choice that creates a conflict between their social and personal lives and their intellectual engagement in school.” (p.270) = mechanism for how classrooms reproduce the inequities of society
  • “To be able to have effects on the world, students must learn to find ways of coordinating multiple perspectives…. it is a matter of identity – of straddling across boundaries and finding ways of being in the world that can encompass multiple, conflicting perspectives in the course of addressing significant issues.” (p.274-5) = mechanism for Controversy in the Classroom (Hess) 

And after all this reading, I think I FINALLY have a better understanding of what is meant by practice. (If I take away nothing more than this, it will have been worth reading this book!) It was the epilogue on design that made this clear. Practice is a response to institutional design, not a just a result of. It is emergent. Lived. Responsive. Negotiated. So you can’t just ask people about the structure of an institution and take it as a crystallization or proxy for what people do. “Communities of practice are about content – about learning as a living experience of negotiating meaning – not about form. In this sense, they cannot be legislated into existence or defined by decree. They can be recognized, supported, encouraged, and nurtured, but they are not reified, designable units. Practice itself is not amenable to design.” (p.229) There’s a little part of me still wondering why you can’t design systems that support and encourage a community of practice with particular qualities or learning, but I think the point is that practice is separate from, though inextricably, dualistically linked with, any kind of reification. Practice is about meaning, community, and learning. It is between and across and within. This is a social theory of learning, after all.

Quick note on my own process: I continue to like being about to use an old fashioned pencil to highlight important sections in my book, and I found that as I went back to type out important quotes, it was also a way to review my understanding. Again, I debated whether to include all my quotes below, but I like being able to search through them, so there you have it.

Books next on the docket:

Quotes and notes:

p. 145 “Building an identity consists of negotiating the meanings of our experience of membership in social communities.”

p.146 “It is … a mistaken dichotomy to wonder whether the unit of analysis of identity should be the community or the person. The focus must be on the process of their mutual constitution.”

p.149 “Inevitably, our practices deal with the profound issue of how to be a human being. In a sense, the formation of a community of practice is also the negotiation of identities.”

what we pay attention to: p.150 “Engagement in practice gives us certain experiences of participation, and what our communities pay attention to reifies us as participants.”

p.151 “In the same way that meaning exists in its negotiation, identity exists – not as an object in and of itself – but in the constant work of negotiating the self. It is in this cascading interplay of participation and reification that our experience of life becomes one of identity, and indeed of human existence and consciousness.”

Mutuality of engagement p.152 “We become who we are by being able to play a part in the relations of engagement that constitute our community.” = mechanism for assimilation

p.153 “Nonetheless, an identity in this sense manifests as a tendency to come up with certain interpretations, to engage in certain actions, to make certain choices, to value certain experiences – all by virtue of participation in certain enterprises.”

p.155 “Outbound trajectories. Some trajectories lead out of the a community, as when children grow up. What matters then is how a form of participation enables what comes next.” – Connection with school research: Schools as prepping kids for their future.

p.155 “As trajectories, our identities incorporate the past and the future in the very process of negotiating the present. The give significance to events in relation to time construed as an extension of the self.”

p.155 “Some of [the claims processors] view the job as their profession, hoping to move on to technical or managerial positions in due time; some are just paying their way through college and have no interest in a professional career in claims processing. These different trajectories give them very different perspectives on their participation and identities at work.”

– this seems true of my experience in schools – I was always thinking about or looking for the next step while other teachers saw their trajectory as staying in the classroom.

p.158 “Our membership in any community of practice is only a part of our identity.”

p.159 “An identity is thus more than just a single trajectory; instead, it should be viewed as a nexus of multimembership.”

p.160 “Learners must often deal with conflicting forms of individuality and competence as defined in different communities.”

p.162 “More generally, what it means to be [labels of different categories, ex. good-looking] – these meanings are shaped by the practices where such categories are lived as engaged identities. Broader categories and institutions attract our attention because they are often more publicly reified than the communities of practice in which we experience them as part of a lived identity.” – reminds me of intercultural competency work and identifiers

p.162 “Indeed, our identities are rich and complex because they are produced within the rich and complex set of relations of practice.”

p.165 “In a landscape defined by boundaries and peripheries, a coherent identity is of necessity a mixture of being in and being out.”

p.165 “Experiences of non-participation are an inevitable part of life, but they take on a different kind of importance when participation and non-pariticpation interact to define each other. For instance, for a novice not to understand a conversation between old-timers becomes significant because this experience of non-participation is aligned with a trajectory of participation. It is the interaction of participation and non-participation that renders the experience consequential.” This is what graduate school feels like…

p.167 “Hence, whether non-participation becomes peripherality or marginality depends on relations of participation that render non-participation either enabling or problematic.”

p.168 “This situation makes boundary crossing difficult, because each side is defined by opposition to the other and membership in one community implies marginalization in another.”

p.171 “These relations of non-participation underlie the artifacts that claim processors use: the forms, the rules, the production reports. Non-pariticipation likewise pervades the relations they develop with customers and representatives of the corporation. When relations of non-participation are mediated by systematic institutional arrangements, they can reach deep into the definition of a practice.” Helpful example of how this perspective helps us understand reality.”

p.175 “Through engagement, competence can become so transparent, locally ingrained, and socially efficacious that it becomes insular: nothing else, no other viewpoint, can even register, let alone create a disturbance or a discontinuity that would spur the history of practice onward. In this way, a community of practice can become an obstacle to learning by entrapping us in its very power to sustain our identity.”

Concept of imagination – really powerful conception of “our experience of the world and our sense of place in it.” (p.176)

p.176 “At the level of engagement, [the two stone cutters] might be doing exactly the same thing. But it does suggest that their experiences of what they are doing and their sense of self in doing it are rather different. This difference is a function of imagination. As a result, they may e learning very different things from the same activity.”

p.177 “Through engagement, participants do not necessarily understand the world, each other’s experience, or their shared enterprise more accurately. Mutual engagement merely creates a shared reality in which to act and construct an identity.” – This seems to be a mechanism for how creating or problem solving together creates relationships (common identities?) between people.

p.178 “The creative character of imagination is anchored in social interactions and communal experiences. Imagination in this sense is not just the production of personal fantasies. Far from an individual withdrawal from reality, it is a mode of belonging that always involves the social world to expand the scope of reality and identity.”

p.179 “Through alignment, we become part of something big because we do what it takes to play our part. What alignment brings into the picture is a scope of action writ large, of coordinated enterprises on a large scale, not inherent in engagement or in imagination.”

Usefulness of the concept: p.181 “calling the viewers of a television program a community of practice, for instance, would be pushing the concept beyond its usefulness.”

Community is not equal to community of practice, though “[b]elonging to such a community can contribute to the identities of those involved, even if it does not involve the joint development of a shared practice.” (p.182)

p.182-183 “Though engagement, imagination, and alignment are distinct modes of belonging, they are not mutually exclusive. A given community can be constituted by all three in various proportions, and the variety of these combinations results in communities with distinct qualities. Given a community, one might wonder what the possibilities for mutual engagement are, what material supports imagination, and how alignment is secured. Such questions focus not on classification but on mechanisms of community formation, as well as on the trade-offs and kinds of work involved.” – These are the structures that you might study of a program. 

p.184 “The work of engagement is basically the work of forming communities of practice.”

p.187 “With insufficient participation, our relations to broader enterprises tend to remain literal and procedural: our coordination tends to be based on compliance rather than participation in meaning. Furthermore, our common terms and share artifacts can have disconnecting as much as connecting effects.”

p.189 “power is not construed exclusively in terms of conflict or domination, but primarily as the ability to act in line with the enterprises we pursue and only secondarily in terms of competing interests.”

p.192 “Engagement in practice is a double source of identification: we invest ourselves in what we do and at the same time we invest ourselves in our relations with other people. As we build communities of practice through this process, we work out our relations with each other and with the world, and we gain a lived sense of who we are.”

p.195 “Note that even when this kind of identification is instantaneous, it still involves the work of imagination – again not in the sense that it is less real than identification based on mutual engagement, but that it brings about relations of identification established through a picture of the world into which the self can be projected.” – This addressed my misconception of imagination as not real.

p.196 “Similarly, ‘going along’ – through willing allegiance or mere submission – is a form of identification because it shapes the way we experience our own power and thus contributes to defining our identity.” – This was absolutely my experience at my first Wisconsin hockey game – when a particular song came on (I think it was Roll Out the Barrel), everyone stood up and started doing a series of dance motions along with the music. I had no idea what they were doing and lamely tried to follow, but I was completely caught off guard. “All this alignment of engirt creates a way of taking part in something big” (p.196) Again, this explains a mechanism for how we get swept up into something like rooting for college athletics.

p.196 “They begrudge the strictures and status of their positions, but they mostly subscribe to the political system that plays them there. Their interpretations of their working conditions are indeed complex and somewhat contradictory.” – Explains how we experience contradictory feelings or observe what seems like contradictory actions but actually make sense.

p.197 “Processes of identification define which meanings matter to us, but do not in themselves determine our ability to negotiate these meanings. Another aspect of identify, therefore, is the issue of negotiability.”

p.201 “What I call ownership of meaning is more intimate; it is deeper than just control. It refers to ways meanings, and our ability to negotiate them, become part of who we are.”

p.203 “I argued in Coda I that learning requires an interplay of experience and competence. A split between production and adoption of meaning thus compromises learning because it presents it as a choice between experience and competence: you must choose between your own experience as a resource for the production of meaning and your membership in a community where your compete is determined by your adoption of other’s proposals for meaning. In other words, learning depends on our ability to contribute to the collective production of meaning because it is by this process that experience and competence pull each other.” – I think this is important but I don’t really understand it.

p.203 “When, in a community of practice, the distinction between the production and adoption of meaning reflects enduring patterns of engagement among members – that is, when some always produce and some always adopt – the local economy of meaning yields very uneven ownership of meaning. This situation, when it persists, results in a mutually reinforcing condition of both marginality and inability to learn.” – Like the achievement gap?

p.203-204 “Imagination, too, can be a way to appropriate meanings. Stories, for instance, can be appropriated easily because they allow us to enter the events, the characters, and their plights by calling upon our imagination…. As a result, they can be integrated into our identities and remembered as personal experience, rather than as mere reification.”

p.204-205 “The processes of imagination involved in assuming that meanings we cannot appropriate belong to someone else can contribute to marginalization.”

p.207 “Theorizing about identity thus entails theorizing also about power and belonging.”

p.207 “Rooted in our identities, power derives from belonging as well as from exercising control over what we belong to.”

p.208 “Identification without negotiability is powerlessness – vulnerability, narrowness, marginality. Conversely, negotiability without identification is empty – it is meaningless power, freedom as isolation and cynicism.”

p.211 “For instance, many communities surround difficult debates with rituals that affirm a shared identification and thus a commitment to working things out.”

p.212 “It does not simply create an opposition between individuality and collectivity, but neither does it simply assimilate them. Instead, it takes a different cut at the individuality-collectivity dichotomy by recasting it in terms of processes of identity formation.”

p.214 “A history of mutual engagement around a joint enterprise is an ideal context for this kind of leading-edge learning, which requires a strong bond of communal competence along with a deep respect for the particularity of experience.”

p.214 “The concepts introduced in Part II can help describe the means by which a community of practice may keep this tension alive and thus be a learning community.”

p.215 “Because learning transform who we are and what we can do, it is an experience of identity.”

p.215 “It is in that formation of an identity that learning can become a source of meaningfulness and of personal and social energy.”

p.215 “As a trajectory, an identity must incorporate a past and a future. Learning communities will become places of identity to the extent they make trajectories possible – that is, to the extent they offer a past and a future that can be experienced as a personal trajectory.”

p.215 constructivist approach:

“1) by incorporating its members’ pasts into its history – that is, by letting what they have been, what they have done, and what they know contribute to the constitution of its practice

2) by opening trajectories of participation that place engagement in its practice in the context of a valued future.”

p.218 “In this regard, I have argues that multimembership is a critical source of learning because it forces an alignment of perspectives in the negotiation of an engaged identity.”

p.219 “From this standpoint, learning is a process of social reconfiguration. It transforms communities and economies of meaning.”

p.220 “Indeed, learning within a community does not necessarily lead to an increased level of negotiability in a broader context. An internal reconfiguration may reflect our new identities, understandings, perspectives, and skills…. A learning community is therefore fundamentally involved in social reconfiguration: its own internally as well as its position within broader configurations.”

p.220 “Access to information without negotiability serves only to intensify the alienating effects of non-participation.”

p.220 sort of like data —> Discourse that I wrote. “What makes information knowledge – what makes it empowering – is the way in which it can be integrated within an identity of participation.”

p.225 “Learning cannot be designed. Ultimately, it belongs to the realm of experience and practice. It follows the negotiation of meaning; it moves on its own terms.”

p.225 “And yet there are few more urgent tasks than to design social infrastructures that foster learning.”

p. 225 “I have argued that the perspectives we bring to our endeavors are important because they shape both what we perceive and what we do.”

p.226 “Indeed, we often learn without having any intention of becoming full members in a specifiable community of practice, or for that matter in any other kind of community.”

p.226 Definition of learning: “It is that learning – whatever form it takes – changes who we are by changing our ability to participate, to belong, to negotiate meaning. And this ability is configured socially with respect to practices, communities, and economies of meaning where it shapes our identities.”

p.228 Definition of design: “a systematic, planned, and reflexive colonization of time and space in the service of an undertaking. This perspective includes not only the production of artifacts, but also the design of social processes such as organizations or instruction.”

p.229 “Learning cannot be designed: it can only be designed for – that is, facilitated or frustrated.”

p.231 “When it concerns practice and identity, design inevitably confronts fundamental issues of meaning, time, space, and power.” “Designing for learning is not a matter of chaos versus order or narrow locality versus abstract globally, but a matter of combing them productively.”

p.233 “I have argued that the structure of practice is emergent, both highly perturbable and highly resilient, always reconstituting itself in the face of new events. Similarly, the structure of identity emerges out of the process of building a trajectory. It is this emerging character that gives practice and identity their ability to negotiate meaning and new. In a world that is not predictable, improvisation and innovation are more than desirable, they are essential. The relation of design to practice is therefore always indirect. It takes place through the ongoing definition of an enterprise by the community pursuing it. In other words, practice cannot be the result of design, but instead constitutes a response to design.”

p.234 “designing for learning, therefore, cannot be based on the division of labor between learners and non-learners, between those who organize learning and those who realize it, or between those who create meaning and those who execute.”

p.239 “so, given a spatial arrangement, a network system, or a curriculum, the idea is to be able to ask how such a design addresses the four dimensions (p.232, diagram above) and provides facilities that support engagement, imagination, and alignment.”

p.243 “Organizational design requires the judicious use of institutionalization, that is, of the production of reflexive reifications such as policies, curriculums, standards, roles, job descriptions, laws, histories, affiliations, and the like. What is institutionalized becomes public, easier to pay attention to, and better able to cross boundaries, but there are costs to institutionalization.” ex. p.244 “excessive institutionalization stalls the organization insofar as the practices end up serving the institutional apparatus, rather than the other way around.” (i.e. terrible PD)

institutional design <—> practice (as a response to, different from just a crystallization of institutional structures)

therefore if you don’t get at people’s PRACTICE and just ask them about the institutions, you never get at their responses or lived experience. No window into how people negotiate meaning or identity.

p.247 “Yet, it is more accurate to view organizational design as a method by which a set of practices manages itself as a constellation”

p.247 “In this regard, it is as important for the design to create channels of communication among practices as it is to create institutional abstractions for them to live by. The fundamental principle is to connect and combine the diverse knowledgeabilities that exist in a constellation of practices. The challenge of organizational design is thus not to find the one kind of knowledgeability that subsumes all others, but on the contrary to coordinate multiple kinds of knowledgeability into a process of organizational learning. Sharing a vision, then, is being able to see each other as well as envisioning common goals.”

training vs. learning —> makes me think of improvement science where the goal is everyone to be constantly learning and improving

like PD could be? p.250 “Similarly, coming together from a variety of locations for a training session can be an occasion for creating a community among people who might not otherwise have much opportunity to meet. This expanded community, the relationships that are created, and the exchange of experiences may well end up being more significant than the content of any instructional program.”

p.251 “First, as people build histories of doing things together, any organization will spawn some communities of practice, even if it makes a habit of indiscriminately tearing them apart. Communities of practice will be there, recognized or not. Second, and more importantly, communities of practice are organizational assets that represent investments in mutual engagement. The learning that they embody constitutes the competence of the organization, and the development of communities of practice is essential to developing this competence.”

p.252 CoP are “nodes for dissemination, interpretation, and use of information”

p. 252-3 relationship of identity and participation in the organization

p.252 CoP as organizational assets

p.254 “boundaries are inevitable and useful. They define a texture for engaged identities, not vague identities that float at the level of an abstract, unfathomable organization.”

p.254 boundaries as innovation zone

p.255 value of people who have multimembership because they are brokers across boundaries

p.255 CoP “do create distinct histories, which give rise to boundaries and can thus be a source of fragmentation. In an organization, the challenge of engagement requires a balancing act between depth and fragmentation.” reminds me of divisional identities and isolations – which from this perspective may be a natural part of the ebb and flow of creation and establishment of CoP and then boundary areas that allow for innovation which then become the CoP and create new histories and their own boundaries.

p.262 Leadership: “As instruments of alignment, leadership, authority, and policies all have the potential to become resources for negotiating meaning – as much as they can thwart the process.”

Chapter 12: Education

p.263 “Education, in its deepest sense and at whatever age it takes place, concerns the opening of identities – exploring new ways of being that lie beyond our current state. Whereas training aims to create an inbound trajectory targeted at competence in a specific practice, education must strive to open new dimensions for the negotiation of the self. It places students on an outbound trajectory toward a broad field of possible identities. Education is not merely formative – it is transformative.”

p.264 “there is a pedagogical cost to reifying in that it requires additional work – even, possibly, a new practice – to make sense of the reification” – just making sense of the way math, for example, is communicated can become its own practice, rather than just being a way to communicate concepts and build skills.

p.264-5 “by reducing knowing to reified items, the codification of knowledge may create the illusion of a simple, direct, unproblematic relation between individual learners and elements of a subject matter.”

p.265 “To the extent that knowledge is reified, decontextualized, or proceduralized, learning can lead to a literal dependence on the reification of the subject matter, and thus (as I argued in Chapter 9) to a brittle kind of understanding with very narrow applicability.” ex. math applied in science class. Kids looked at me like they had never heard of how to convert kilometers to meters when I know they had been doing it since at least 4th grade!

p.265 “The primary focus must be on the negotiation of meaning rather than on the mechanics of information transmission and acquisition.” Though maybe sometimes the mechanics might help you negotiate? Memorization of formula might help you eventually negotiate their meaning?

p.266 I have gained a new appreciation of the word “participate,” as in participatory cultures, after reading this chapter

p.266 “Instruction does not cause learning; it creates the context in which learning takes place, as do other contexts.”

p.267 “the real issue underlying all these debates is the instruction of the planned and the emergent” – definitely see this with personalized learning – allowing students to plan their own course, have them create their own products from the same prompt/experience

p.267 “if school practices become self-contained then they cease to point anywhere beyond themselves. School learning is just learning school” – I have noted in a few of the PL schools that there is a refrain of preparing kids for their future, essentially supporting a trajectory that will take them out of the community/school.

p.268 “The ability to learn flexibly depends not on abstraction of formulation but on deepening the negotiation of meaning. This in turn depends on engaging identities in the complexity of lived situations. I would argue that the problem of generality is not just an informational question; it is more fundamentally a question of identity, because identity is the vehicle that carries our experiences from context to context. From this perspective, schools gain relevance not just by the content of their teaching – much of which can be acquired just as well in other circumstances – but by the experiments of identity that students can engage in while there. Consequently, deep transformative experiences that involve new dimensions of identification and negotiability, new forms of membership, multimembership, and ownership of meaning – even in one specific or narrowly defined domain – are likely to be more widely significant in terms of the long-term ramifications of learning than extensive coverage of a broad, but abstractly general, curriculum.”

p.269 PL as strengthening student’s identity? we’ve heard a lot of students talk about their community – is this because they actually interact more or is it because they know themselves more?

p.269 Mechanism for how classrooms reproduce the inequities of society: “Focusing on an institutionalized curriculum without issues of identity thus runs the risk of serving only those who already have an identity of participation with respect to the material in other contexts.” p.270 “In fact, for many students, school presents a choice between a meaningful identity and learning – a choice that creates a conflict between their social and personal lives and their intellectual engagement in school.”

p.272 Also like PL (portfolio?): “A curriculum would then look more like an itinerary of transformative experiences of participation than a list of subject matter.”

p. 272-3 “Students must be enabled to explore who they are, who they are not, who they could be” through orientation, reflection, and exploration.

p.274 “a large part of institutionalized educational design consists in an apprenticeship in institutional identity” – learning how to navigate the system is part of the learning

p.274-5 Mechanism for Controversy in the Classroom (Hess) “To be able to have effects on the world, students must learn to find ways of coordinating multiple perspectives…. it is a matter of identity – of straddling across boundaries and finding ways of being in the world that can encompass multiple, conflicting perspectives in the course of addressing significant issues.” 

p.276 “If the pedagogical and institutional functions of educators completely displace their ability to manifest their identities as participants in their communities of practice, they lose their most powerful teaching asset. For instance, in many schools, the separation from mature practice is exacerbated by the roles of teachers as managers of large classrooms. In such a role, teachers do not have much opportunity to act as themselves – as adults and thus as doorways into the adult world. Rather, they constantly have to act as teachers – that is, as representatives of the institution and upholders of curricular demands, with an identity defined by an institutional role. Hence, in terms of forming identities of participation, the organization of schooling tends to offer students very limited contacts with adulthood as a lived identity.”

p.277 “Indeed, the mutuality of engagement is a mutuality of learning.” Again, this is what we see in PL where students and teachers engage in learning together.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s