The coffee shop, more than any other setting demonstrated a community of practice. It had a learning focus as opposed to a teaching focus, one of the key elements that defines a community of practice. The classroom instructors switched roles with the coffee shop instructor and took on more of a supportive role. While the coffee shop instructor, Carrie, focused on modeling and coaching in her approach to teaching, the students were expected to take on the role of supervisor. In addition, the learning purpose was clear (the students had to run a small food service business); they understood the whole and not simply discrete pieces of knowledge (they had opportunities to see and experience each of the jobs and activities that were necessary in a small business); the coffee shop was set up as an improvised practice opportunity to prepare students for work; and the curriculum, based on the six coffee shop jobs, was an opportunity to engage directly in practice and not dictates for practice.

Participation and Legitimate Peripheral Participation

It was in the coffee shop setting that participation could be described in the greatest detail compared to the other two settings. To help with this description, Wenger's (1998) interpretation of legitimate peripheral participation will also be used. Building on the notion that participation involves the construction of identities as an individual engages in a productive activity in a community of practice is the idea of legitimate peripheral participation. In legitimate peripheral participation, an individual is fully accepted into a community of practice, is considered a newcomer and is trained by oldtimers, is immediately engaged in activities that are integral to the learning process, receives monitoring and support, and is given room to make errors. All of which leads to the students' changing identity and new ways to see themselves as employees and learners.

Acceptance

New students were accepted into the coffee shop environment despite cultural, age, gender, and personality differences. Instructors explained how they purposefully set a tone of mutual respect, openness, and non–judgmental attitudes. In addition, students have learned to trust that their instructors will not permit anyone to jeopardize the environment that was created in the coffee shop. They have witnessed their instructors address issues with students whose words, attitude, or habits may be detrimental to the group. For example, one instructor worked closely with a student whose lack of hygiene was preventing his acceptance in the group. Instructors said that they quickly address students who are overly sharp, critical, or rude to one another in order to maintain a supportive and inclusive environment. Another example of the kind of open and accepting environment that a new student entered was the way in which students shared their breaks. In other classes, in the general literacy program, students usually took breaks with others who shared a dominant cultural similarity, such as ethnicity, gender, or age. This did not seem to occur as often with students in the employment preparation program. Rouda commented on the feeling of acceptance that existed in the coffee shop.