I am unaware of any examples of the collective that doesn't concern itself at least minimally with the nature, purpose, and value of community. Take for example, Open Source Ecology, a collective designed to "create and open source economy" (opensourceecology.org, n.d). They are certainly a collective, providing open source designs of the 50 machines deemed essential to human survival. Anyone can contribute to the growing knowledge base and learn from the contributions of others. And yet clearly, they derive strength from creating a sense of belonging, sponsoring internships, visits, a residency program, and university chapters.
Perhaps it just depends on what the definition of "ordinary" is in Thomas and Brown's description is.
Qualms with this definition aside, I value learning in the collective. However, intention, focus, and process seem to matter greatly. Within or without of the collective, learning remains a process that benefits from best practices. A group, gathering for the purpose of learning, still needs focus and a process to support their learning. Such a process, known as progressive inquiry builds the knowledge of the collective in a purposeful and efficient way (Helsinki.fl, n.d.).
Centre for Research on Networked Learning and Knowledge Building: Scientific Background. (n.d.). Retrieved October 1, 2015.
Open Source Ecology. (n.d.). Retrieved October 1, 2015.
Thomas, D., & Brown, J. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. Lexington, Ky.: [CreateSpace?].