\documentclass[a4paper, 12pt, twoside,showtrims]{memoir} \makeatletter \renewcommand\@dotsep{10000} \renewcommand{\l@part}{\l@chapter} \renewcommand{\l@section}{\@dottedtocline{1}{1.5em}{2.6em}} \renewcommand{\l@subsection}{\@dottedtocline{2}{4.0em}{3.6em}} \renewcommand{\l@subsubsection}{\@dottedtocline{3}{7.4em}{4.5em}} \makeatother \makeatletter \def\below{\xdef\@thefnmark{}\@footnotetext} \makeatother \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{times} %\usepackage[MnSymbol]{mathspec} %\setmathsfont(Digits,Latin,Greek)[Numbers={Lining,Proportional}]{Linux Libertine O} %\setminwhitespace % not sure if this helps %\setmathrm{Linux Biolinum O} %\usepackage{xunicode} %\defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text} %\setmainfont{Linux Libertine O} %% \setmainfont[Mapping= tex-text, %% SmallCapsFont={Linux Libertine O}, %% SmallCapsFeatures= {Color=6600CC, RawFeature={+smcp,+hlig,+dlig}}, %% BoldFont={Linux Biolinum O Bold}, %% BoldFeatures={Color = E6005C,SmallCapsFont={Linux Libertine Capitals O Bold},% %% SmallCapsFeatures = { Color=996600, RawFeature={+smcp,+hlig,+dlig}} }, %% ItalicFont={Linux Libertine O Italic}, %% ItalicFeatures={Color = 00CC00, RawFeature={+liga,+hlig,+dlig}, % %% SmallCapsFont={Linux Libertine Capitals O Italic}, % %% SmallCapsFeatures = {Color=00FFFF,RawFeature={+smcp,+hlig,+dlig}}}, %% BoldItalicFont={Linux Biolinum O}, %% BoldItalicFeatures={ Color = 3366FF, % %% SmallCapsFont={Linux Libertine Capitals O Bold Italic}, % %% SmallCapsFeatures = { Color=3366FF,RawFeature={+smcp,+hlig,+dlig}}} ]{Linux Libertine O} \newcommand\marktransition{\begin{center}◆\end{center}} \newcommand\marktransitionempty{\begin{center}\quad\end{center}} \usepackage{wrapfig} %\usepackage[T1]{fontenc} %\usepackage[math]{kurier} % {regular} {light} {condensed} {mathnoalias} {math} \usepackage[english,greek]{babel} \usepackage[super]{natbib} %%% How to add per section bibliographies %% The natbib package is compatible with the chapterbib package which makes it possible to have several bibliographies in one document. %% The package makes use of the \include command, and each \included file has its own bibliography. %% The order in which the chapterbib and natbib packages are loaded is unimportant. %% The chapterbib package provides an option sectionbib that puts the bibliography in a \section* instead of \chapter*, something that makes sense if there is a bibliography in each chapter. This option will not work when natbib is also loaded; instead, add the option to natbib. %% Every \included file must contain its own \bibliography command where the bibliography is to appear. The database files listed as arguments to this command can be different in each file, of course. However, what is not so obvious, is that each file must also contain a \bibliographystyle command, preferably with the same style argument. \usepackage{indentfirst} \usepackage{marvosym} \usepackage{fourier-orns} \usepackage{datetime} \let\dateseparator. \ddmmyyyydate \usepackage{rotating} \usepackage{enumitem} \AtBeginDocument{\addtocontents{toc}{\protect\thispagestyle{empty}}} \aliaspagestyle{part}{empty} \renewcommand{\thepart}{\Roman{part}} \chapterstyle{thatcher} \settrimmedsize{9in}{6in}{*} \settrims{1in}{1.25in} \settypeblocksize{7.7in}{4.8in}{*} \setlrmarginsandblock{.75in}{*}{*} \setulmargins{.75in}{*}{*} \setheadfoot{\onelineskip}{2\onelineskip} %%\setheaderspaces{*}{1.5\onelineskip}{*} \setheaderspaces{*}{.5\onelineskip}{*} \checkandfixthelayout %% \setlrmarginsandblock{23mm}{23mm}{*} %% \setulmarginsandblock{23mm}{28mm}{*} %% \setheadfoot{\onelineskip}{2\onelineskip} %% \setheaderspaces{*}{1mm}{*} %% \chapterstyle{plain} %% \checkandfixthelayout \PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url} \usepackage[frenchlinks,pdfborderstyle={/S/U/W .5},citebordercolor={1 1 1},linkbordercolor={1 1 1},urlbordercolor={1 1 1}]{hyperref} \begin{document} \sloppy \selectlanguage{english} \title{The Peeragogy Handbook\\[1in]} \author{ Bryan Alexander, Paul Allison, R\'egis Barondeau, \\ Doug Breitbart, Suz Burroughs, Joseph Corneli, \\ Charles Jeffrey Danoff, Julian Elve, Mar\'ia Fernanda,\\ James Folkestad, Kathy Gill, Gigi Johnson, Anna Keune,\\ Roland Legrand, Amanda Lyons, Christopher Neal, \\ Ted Newcomb, Stephanie Parker, David Preston, \\ Howard Rheingold, Paola Ricaurte, Stephanie Schipper, \\ and Geoff Walker } \date{\today\ (version 0.982)} \maketitle \thispagestyle{empty} \quad \\[3in] \begin{center} {\large All content here is Public Domain (CC0) unless noted.} \end{center} \thispagestyle{empty} \cleardoublepage \frontmatter \tableofcontents* \mainmatter \part{Introduction} \chapter[\textbf{Welcome!}]{Welcome to the Peeragogy Handbook, a Resource for Self-organizing Self-learners$^*$} With YouTube, Wikipedia, search engines, free chatrooms, blogs, wikis, and video communication, today's self-learners have power never dreamed-of before. What does any group of self-learners need to know in order to self-organize learning about any topic? The Peeragogy Handbook is a volunteer-created and maintained resource for bootstrapping peer learning. \emph{\textbf{*Self-learners:} largely self-directed learners who take it upon themselves to find useful ways to learn.} This project seeks to empower the worldwide population of self-motivated learners who use digital media to connect with each other, to co-construct knowledge, to co-learn. Co-learning is ancient; the capacity for learning by imitation and more, to teach others what we know, is the essence of human culture. We are human because we learn together. Today, however, the advent of digital production media and distribution/communication networks has raised the power of co-learning to a new level. If you want to learn how to fix a pipe, solve a partial differential equation, write software, you are seconds away from know-how via YouTube, Wikipedia and search engines. Access to technology and access to knowledge, however, isn't enough. Learning is a social, active, and ongoing process. What would a motivated group of self-learners need to know to agree on a subject or skill, find and qualify the best learning resources about that topic, select and use appropriate communication media to co-learn it? Beyond technology, what do they need to know about learning and putting learning programs together? What does a group of people need to know to use today's digital resources to co-learn a subject? This handbook is intended to answer that last question and provide a toolbox for co-learners. Although ``paragogy'' is a more rationally derived word that extends ``pedagogy'' (teaching children) and ``androgogy'' (teaching adults), we're using the word \emph{peeragogy} because many people get the point as soon as we use the word. (In some places, we style the word ``\emph{p\ae ragogy}'' to remind the reader of the fusion of ``peer'' and ``para-'' modalities: we will say more about this \href{http://peeragogy.org/to-peeragogy/\%20?}{later on}.) Our experience within this project has been that flattened hierarchies do not necessarily mean decisions go by consensus. The handbook is in part a ``collaboration'' and in part a collection of single-author works. Often the lines and voices are blurred. One constant throughout the book is our interest in making something \emph{useful. }To this end, the book comes with numerous \href{http://peeragogy.org/activities/}{activities}, and is available under non-restrictive legal terms (you can reuse portions of it however you see fit). For those who seek more evidence-based, scholarly scaffolding for learning practices, we also maintain a \href{http://peeragogy.org/resources/literature-review-peeragogy/}{literature review} of learning theories that pertain to self-organized peer learning. We also include instructions on how to join us in further developing the resource.\\ - \emph{the Peeragogy team} \chapter[\textbf{How to use this handbook}]{How to use this handbook} \below{By: Howard Rheingold} \textbf{Summary}: This document is a practical guide to online co-learning, a living document that invites comment and invites readers to join the community of editors; the document does not have to be read in linear order from beginning to end. If you and a group of other people want to use digital media and networks to co-learn together, this handbook is a practical tool for learning how to self-organize peer learning --- what we call ``peeragogy.'' Material about conceptualizing and convening co-learning --- the stuff about getting started --- is located toward the top of the table of contents. Material about assessment, resources, use cases is located toward the bottom of the TOC. But you don't have to read it in sequential order. Hop around if you'd like. We think --- and some research seems to support --- that understanding how co-learning works will help you do co-learning more effectively. So we've included material about learning theories that support peer learning or that reveal useful characteristics of successful peer learning. For those who want to delve more deeply into the empirical research and scholarship, we've linked to a sister document --- a literature review of learning theory related to peeragogy. For those who want to study more deeply about the aspects of peer learning we summarize in our articles, we provide a list of links to related handbook articles, and a set of resources for further study. Think of our pages as both places to start and as jumping off points. % The short videos, most of them under one minute long, at the very beginning of many articles are meant to convey a sense of what the article and its supporting material is meant to get across. This is a living document. If you want to join our community of editors, contact \href{mailto:howard@rheingold.com}{howard@rheingold.com} (If you want to see how we go about creating a handbook entry, see our guide for newcomers.) If you don't want to go as far as joining the community of editors, please feel free to use the comment thread attached to each page to suggest changes and/or additions. Links: \href{http://peeragogy.org/how-to-get-involved/}{Guide to getting started}, \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/initial-outline-source-book}{handbook outline}, resources, \href{http://peeragogy.org/literature-review-learning-theories-supporting-peeragogy/}{literature review} \part{Peer Learning} \chapter[\textbf{Introduction to Peer Learning}]{An Introduction to Peer Learning} \textbf{Introduction} The new term, ``peeragogy'', that we use in this book is a riff on the word pedagogy --- the art, science, or profession of teaching. Pedagogy has a somewhat problematic origin story: it comes from the ancient Greek tradition of having a child (paidos) be supervised (agogos) by a slave. Greek philosophers disagreed with each other as to the best way for individuals to gain knowledge (and even moreso, wisdom). Socrates, who insisted that he was not wise, also insisted that his interlocutors join him in investigating truth claims, as peers. The most famous of these interlocutors, Plato, on a more pedagogical bent, spoke of an the enlightened few, whose responsibility it was to show others the light of knowledge (illustrated by his famous allegory of ``The Cave''). The debate continues today! Indeed, for centuries, various education theorists and reformers have challenged the effectiveness of the traditional teacher-led model. Most famous of the early education reformers in the United States was John Dewey, who advocated new experiential learning techniques. In his 1916 book, Democracy and Education, Dewey wrote, ``Education is not an affair of `telling' and being told, but an active and constructive process.`\,' Soviet psychologist Lev Vygotsky, who developed the concept of the Zone of Proximal Development, was another proponent of ``constructivist'' learning. His book, Thought and Language, also gives evidence to support collaborative, socially meaningful, problem-solving activities over solo exercises. One influential scholar in the development of the field of ``critical pedagogy'' was Paulo Freire. In the book Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire describes the traditional teaching framework as a banking system in which students are empty vessels in which knowledge and concepts are to be deposited. Freire advocated a more equitablev relationship between teachers and students --- one in which information is questioned and situated in its political context. In the 1980?s, Edwin Hutchins developed Distributed Cognition theory. In this view, knowledge lies not only within the individual but is situated in the individual's social and physical environment. Distributed cognition refers to processes whereby cognitive resources are socially shared, extending individual cognitive resources, and allowing groups to accomplish some things individuals cannot achieve alone. According to Paulo Blikstein, Assistant Professor of Education at Stanford University, technology can be used as a tool for making the Freirean ideal a reality (Travels in Troy with Freire: Technology as an Agent of Emancipation). Inspired by MIT mathematician Seymour Papert's work with the LOGO programming language, Blikstein ran a series of expressive creativity workshops for students at a public school in S\~{a}o Paulo, Brazil. Blikstein found that ``through the exploratory building activities, ``Not only did students become more autonomous and responsible, they learned to teach one another.'' A common thread runs from Socratric dialogs through Freirean critical pedagogy --- the desire to be freed from the rigid boundaries of traditional social and political hierarchy. Although peer learning does not always imply a subversion of traditional roles and abandoning the teacher-student hierarchy, it does imply a strong personal commitment to your own learning and to your peers in a learning environment where all are co-learners. As to whether or not peer learning will serve as a catalyst for social change --- this depends on how it is deployed. \textbf{Beginnings of contemporary Peer Learning Theory} Educational Psychology Professor Alison King explains in Thinking Through Peer Learning that peer learning exercises as simple as having students explain concepts to one another l demands that students clarify, elaborate on, and otherwise reconceptualize material. Carl Rogers Personal Thoughts on Learning focus on the individuals experience of effective learning: self-discovered learning in a group that designates a facilitator is the new approach Rogers recommends for education. Yochai Benkler explains how the now-ubiquitous computer helps us produce and process knowledge with others in his book, The Wealth of Networks. The advancement and spread of technology have led digital learning theorist George Siemens to introduce a new theory called Connectivism. He argues in Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age, that technology has changed the way we learn, explaining how it tends to complicate or expose the limitations of the learning theories of the past. The crucial point of connectivism is that the connections that make it possible for us to learn in the future are more relevant than the sets of knowledge we know individually, in the present. Furthermore, technology to can to some degree and in certain contexts, replace know-how with know-where-to-look. Roy Williams argues that educational institutions should consider emergent learning, in which learning arises from a self-organized group interaction, as a valuable component of education in the Digital Age. WikiQuals is a project born in 2011 that seeks to one day replace the traditional high stakes assessment model of academic accreditation, using learning processes derived from emergent learning theory. Web 2.0 puts distributed individuals into a group setting where emergent learning can occur. Deciding how to manage emergence is important: fail-safe management drives activity towards pre-determined outcomes, while safe/fail experiments steer away from negative outcomes while leaving space open for mistakes and innovation. Cathy Davidson \& David Goldberg write in The Future of Learning Institutions in a Digital Age about the potential of participatory learning, which is how people today use technology to join virtual communities and exchange ideas. Similar ideas are discussed by Carl Bereiter in Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age. If schools and universities could harness the potential power of participatory learning, they could transform education. \textbf{Experiments with Peer-to-Peer Learning} What are the practical realities? The learning theories described above are being tested in various contexts around the world. One of these settings is Peer 2 Peer University, or P2PU, which was founded in 2009 by Philipp Schmidt, Delia Browne, and Neeru Paharia, as a free, online, space for peer learning. Schmidt believes that a set of specific factors made space for initiatives like P2PU: an abundance of high quality free content, the ability to connect with millions of learners on the Internet, and some tumultuous events in the higher education sector. These challenges included a demand for high quality but inexpensive education in developing countries, and a growing demand for ``learning skills`\,' that are not necessarily included within a university education. Schmidt put a team together and established the first experimental P2PU courses: Introduction to Cyberpunk Literature and Playing Poker \& Strategic Thinking. Schmidt explains that, ``The expertise is in the group. Thats the message, that everyone can bring something to the conversation.'' In his essay Commons-based Peer Production and Education, Philipp Schmidt examines the idea that the social assessment mechanisms inherent in open-source software development can be applied to education. He feels that online reputation may one day replace the traditional degree as the most popular indicator for how much we should trust someones opinion on a subject. Schmidt argues in Peer-to-Peer Recognition of Learning in Open Education, that peer-based assessment and recognition are a feasible option for accreditation purposes. In open source communities, a user has various ways to signal that they are an expert. In a more open scenario, the traditional pillars of social status would be removed to make way for more fluid definitions of trust and relevance of expertise. Concetely, we see things like the rise of the twit-o-sphere as representations of mediated influence and expertise. And yet, the situation is not entirely perfected at P2PU. Participant engagement is an issue, with many people silently joining only to ``lurk`\,'. P2PU itself has introduced several changes in the way it works over the years, with the latest introduction being ``challenges'' that can be completed at any time (rather than necessarily forming part of a scheduled course), alongside courses, badges, and community features for which P2PU is known and respected. Further discussion in the next section! \chapter[\textbf{Why ``Peeragogy''?}]{From Peer Learning to ``Peeragogy''} \section*{Introduction} \emph{A healthy process for learning in paragogy consists in a direct evolution of the four principles of parliamentary democracy: (1) The right to speak; (2) The right to be heard; (3) The right to listen; (4) The right to cooperate in the proliferation of options, that is, the right to ``co-lead'' in the decision-making system.} --- \href{http://campus.ftacademy.org/community/mod/groups/topicposts.php?topic=10060\&group\_guid=8500}{Fabrizio Terzi}. \bigskip The idea that we needed a new theory (which we initially called \emph{paragogy}) arose out of the challenges we faced doing peer learning. Specifically, we were particularly interested in the conditions that were required for volunteer contributors to drive an learning-focused organization's agenda, and improve things for participating learners and teachers. How could the organization itself ``learn'' and grow, while participants were also learning and becoming better contributors? As this idea took form, we reflected more on how learning and organizations work. Just like it would be rare for a business to be successful if it does not take into account the needs and interests of its clients, it is unlikely for a learning project to be successful if the act of learning is not somehow relevant for the people doing it. So, paragogy became a set of proposed principles for understanding learning (and working) together. In particular, we focused on the way in which co-learners shape their learning context together. Paragogy is not a recipe: its ideas can grow and change to suit the needs of the moment; as it has matured, it has become more of an ``approach'' than it is a set of set-in-stone principles. Again, we look at how people adapt by co-producing a learning context; so, for example, it would not be easy to build a ``\emph{democratic}'' organization without shared understandings like the points expressed by Fabrizio Terzi, quoted above. As time goes by, we hope that we can build paragogical tools that will help people share their skills, and learn while working together. It is important to learn more about how to invest one's time and energy efficiently. At present, ``learning'' is often thought of as something that happens separately from the rest of life (i.e. in school or university, or perhaps in libraries and cafes). But in fact, learning and adaptation are dynamic processes which are happening all the time. The separation of learning from daily life contributes to making educational goals appear to be very ``distant''. Thus, it would not be atypical to find someone saying: \emph{It would be better for me to be a drug dealer than to study mathematics, since it will take me years and years before the mathematics study pays off, whereas I can make money selling drugs right away.} Paragogy does not say this thinking is ``wrong''. Rather, it looks for ways to make adaptation of all forms work better: so, if you want to use paragogy to learn how to become a better drug dealer, we certainly aren't going to stop you (and, indeed, there are numerous good examples of paragogy coming from ``street culture''; but we do advise you to Protect Ya Neck!). The word ``paragogy'' itself is a massive multi-lingual pun. In Greek, it means ``\emph{production}''. In Latin, it also means, roughly, the kinds of words produced by adding a given prefix or suffix to another word (so, it is in some sense a pun on its own name!). Its roots mean ``alongside leading'', so we either get the sense of a sustained critical attitude --- if not a subversive leading astray, \emph{a la} Socrates of the Apology --- or simply of ``teamwork''. Of course, the basic meaning in English is just ``peer learning'', and, for this reason, we often pronounce it ``peeragogy'' when we are talking about its more learning-specific aspects. ``Peeragogy'' is also riff on the word ``andragogy'', which comes from Malcolm Knowles. He wrote: \begin{quotation} \emph{\ldots andragogy is simply another model of assumptions about adult learners to be used alongside the pedagogical model of assumptions, thereby providing two alternative models for testing out the assumptions as to their `fit' with particular situations. Furthermore, the models are probably most useful when seen not as dichotomous but rather as two ends of a spectrum , with a realistic assumption (about learners) in a given situation falling in between the two ends} (Knowles, 1980, p. 43 ). \end{quotation} We also tried, at least at first, to be similarly non-oppositional with respect to andragogy: \begin{quotation} \emph{\ldots{} {[}T{]}he most important initial condition in andragogy seems to be that an adult educator or facilitator is part of the picture. In a peer-based setting, that may not be the case: we can easily find examples of learning environments where there is no ``teacher'' in the ``classroom''; where, for example, the task of facilitation is shared among all participants or even encoded in the learning materials or supportive technologies. Not that one way is more desirable than another: we simply mean to highlight the fact that the most basic features of a given learning environment will influence everything else.} --- \url{http://paragogy.net/ParagogyPaper1} \end{quotation} Knowles noted many reasons to move to a theory of adult learning that took the needs of adults into account --- but many of these same reasons suggest that we need a better theory of peer learning if we are going to really use it to its full potential. Consider: \begin{itemize} \item Many people in online learning contexts are NOT taking initiative. There is a ``90/9/1 rule'' that says that, online, 1\% of people create content, 9\% edit or modify that content, and 90\% view the content without contributing. Is this rule fixed? How do we work in a world where the rule applies (or shift things, so that it doesn't)? \item If we want to understand human psychological development, we clearly need a \emph{social} psychology component. \item While it is generally a good idea for people to take responsibility and initiative in their own learning, this does not come cheaply, and it is rare to find a ``wise person'' who has all the answers about how that should work; instead, we prefer to participate in a broader ``Socratic'' discussion around the topic of learning. \item The strange new world of computers is in fact very familiar to some of us, who have created some new strategies for learning in these spaces --- and we aim to share them here (as well as look at ``low-tech'' strategies for learning that work just as well). \end{itemize} We will next say a few words about some related theories of learning which bear certain similarities to paragogy/peeragogy (\ldots{} or \emph{p\ae ragogy} for short) and which can help contextualize it. \textbf{So\ldots{} how do you spell it??} As its etymology indicates, ``paragogy'' is a broad and somewhat abstract term. ``Peeragogy'' attempts to make the term more concrete and immediately understandable: clearly, \emph{peeragogy is about peers learning together, and teaching each other}. But when we wish to remind the reader who ``is in the know'' that things are, in fact, more complicated, we will style the word ``p\ae ragogy'', as a reminder that we are really talking about ``peer produced learning'' broadly construed, and definitely not just about a new model of ``education''! \subsection{Constructivism and friends} \emph{Constructivism} is an umbrella term describing several learning theories. The main idea of constructivism is that learners actively construct (grow, make, create, build) their own understanding. \emph{Social constructivism} focuses on interactions among learners. One of its main themes is the growth of shared collective knowledge in groups and networks. For example, social constructivism underlies the theory of communities of practice. While the ground work can be traced to Vygotsky (1930s), the ideas started to gain momentum in the 1970s. \emph{Radical constructivism} (also referred to as \emph{Piagetian constructivism}) focuses on how individuals construct knowledge. The term ``radical'' (von Glasersfeld, 1970s) comes from the claim that no knowledge is ever ``perceived through senses'' but all knowledge is built by the learner. \emph{Enactivism} emphasizes interaction of learners with the environment. It builds bridges across divides between different learning theories. In particular, it resolves seeming contradictions between social and radical constructivism. It is a more recent branch of constructivism, with publications beginning in the 1990s. \emph{Constructionism} focuses on learning via designing and making artefacts. While the theory is not restricted by the type of artefacts, many of the original constructionists in the late 1970s and early 1980s worked with computer software. Therefore, much of constructionism research focuses on software design as a learning task. In 2000s, the Maker and DIY movements gained momentum and connected with constructionist ideas. Constructionism also connects with social media ideas, such as co-production. \emph{Connectivism} is another more recent variant, especially suited to an online context. In short, connectivism situates learning in the networks of connections made among individuals, texts, and each other. We have an article about the practicalities this here: \url{http://peeragogy.org/connectivism-in-practice-how-to-organize-a-mooc/} P\ae ragogy would tend to prefer a blend of the ``constructionist'' and ``enactivist'' approaches, which would position learners as both designing and re-constructing their environment, their language, etc.. Neither technology nor environment is trancendental in this approach. Rather, learning is a form of adaptation, which also includes a ``terraforming'' component --- and the question of what to ``affirm'' through practice becomes very concrete. We continue with this theme below. \subsection{Different ways to engage} Since we are interested in how students (and others) can collaborate in learning, bringing to their own particular experiences, strengths, and weaknesses to bear, we ask: ``How can each participant contribute to a group in their own way? Which kind of activities can we design to foster ``multi-modal'' collaborative learning, and how do we assess the outcomes? One approach is to look at the ``multiple different social roles'' which people take on in educational contexts: \begin{quotation} \emph{{[}W{]}e use {[}Ken{]} Wilber's terms to describe a given social role in terms of its constituent actions. So for example, the role of ``being a student'' might be described as follows: \emph{``}\textbf{\emph{I}}\emph{ go to class, }\textbf{\emph{we}}\emph{ do a class project, the objects of concern (``}\textbf{\emph{Its}}\emph{'') are things I can add to my portfolio or work-record; and fundamentally }\textbf{\emph{it}}\emph{ is all about gaining a skill.'' }This simple background story gives us a notion of role, persona, or identity: a role that is defined by its constituent actions, relative a given social context. And here, context is conceived of, after Nishida, as a ``shared context in motion''.} {[}1{]} \end{quotation} \marktransition By looking at different roles, we begin to get at ``different paths and modalities of contribution''. In addition, the I/We/Its/It framework can be used to decouple learning (and learning design) from any fixed cycle or set of ``stages'' (e.g. \emph{Guidance \& Support}, \emph{Communication \& Collaboration}, \emph{Reflection \& Demonstration}, \emph{Content \& Activities} as used by Conole, or the \emph{Forming}, \emph{Norming}, \emph{Storming}, \emph{Performing} framework from Tuckman). This is not to say that those frameworks are not useful --- but they should not overdetermine our approach to learning design (see comments by Lisewski and Joyce on another ``staged'' model, namely Salmon's ``five-stage e-moderating model''). This ``decoupled'' or ``lightly coupled'' frame of analysis is likely to be a useful move if learning is happening on an ongoing basis among peers, with the learning context being reshaped and redefined as we go. Whatever the ``outer'' framework, learning activities can be sorted into categories like: \emph{Assimilative}, \emph{Information Processing}, \emph{Communicative}, \emph{Productive}, \emph{Experiential}, \emph{Adaptive} (Oliver and Conole) (etc.) --- or in terms of the ``multiples intelligences'' used (per Howard Gardner): \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=3in]{./pictures/multiple_intelligences.jpg} \scriptsize{image from \url{http://educ732.courseblock.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/multiple\_intelligences.jpg}} \end{center} \end{figure} Indeed, much as we would seek to decouple our ``outer'' frame of analysis from a cycle, the different ``types'' of activities may be very subject-, activity-, or person-specific. For example, we might ask participants to code activities in terms of their associated ``mental state'' (after Cs\'ikszentmihályi), rather than their associated ``intelligence'': \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics{./pictures/challenge.png} \scriptsize{image from \url{http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Challenge\_vs\_skill.svg/300px-Challenge\_vs\_skill.svg.png}} \end{center} \end{figure} We could also describe ourselves (or our roles within a learning process, as above) in terms of various attributes, e.g. using the proposed framework of Learning Power, with its seven dimensions: changing and learning -vs- being stuck and static, making meaning -vs- accumulating data, critical curiosity -vs- passivity, creativity -vs- being rule-bound, learning relationships -vs- isolation and/or dependence, strategic awareness -vs- being robotic, resilience -vs- fragility (Deakin-Crick, Broadfoot, and Claxton). Similar ideas are summed up in Claxton's four-dimensional framework based on: \emph{resilience}, \emph{resourcefulness}, \emph{reciprocity} and \emph{reflection}. Whatever framework we use, it is important to remember that, rather than seeing a person's ``learning power'' in a given situation as an ``essential'' attribute of who they are, one would rather see a person's overall ``disposition to learning'' as part of an (at least) two-way relationship (Wacquant, 2006). Thus, peers might use this framework to both better understand how learning could work in a given situation, and to work together to devise suitable individual or system-level interventions that would make it work better. In sum, we have shown some different ways in which learning and learning activities can be described. Rather than ``reproducing the system'', this sort of open-ended descriptive-design process can be used by learners to identify the topics and ideas of concern to them, as well as to build their own language, and their own set of social roles, to talk about and devise methods for addressing issues of concern; cf. Askins and Pain, who write ``\emph{Reading and relating to the research context as a contact zone, then, necessitates working with and through issues of voice, agency, power, and desire alongside all participants in the process.}'' What is true of the contact zones in collaborative inquiry research is if anything even more true for the zones of proximal development we co-create in peeragogy! The move from merely studying ``peer learning'' to ``doing peeragogy'' is a big step. But of course --- it is one we take together. \subsection{Activity} \emph{tableau vivant }(Interpersonal - Linguistic --- kinesthetical)Ask participants to create, in groups, a tableau vivant of a given sequence/scene from a film. Have each person capture a particular essence/character/situation of the scene. Ask them to freeze their tableau while the rest of the group observes and identifies the scene, asking questions, and offering comments and critiques. \section*{Citations} Askins and Pain, Contact zones: participation, materiality, and the messiness of interaction Guy Claxton, Building Learning Power: Helping Young People Become Better Learners, TLO: Bristol, 2002 Joseph Corneli and Alexander Mikroyannidis, Crowdsourcing Education on the Web: A Role-based Analysis of Online Learning Communities, in Alexandra Okada, Teresa Conolly, and Peter Scott (eds.), \emph{Collaborative Learning 2.0: Open Educational Resources}, IGI Global, 2012. (Archived at \url{http://oro.open.ac.uk/33221/}) Gráinne Conole, Designing for learning in an open world, Springer (see also \url{http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue58/conole/}). Ruth Deakin-Crick, Patricia Broadfoot and Guy Claxton, Developing an Effective Lifelong Learning Inventory: The ELLI Project, Assessment in Education, 11(3), pp. 237--72, 2004 Knowles, M. S. (1980) The Modern Practice of Adult Education. Andragogy versus pedagogy, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall/Cambridge. Lisewski, B., and P. Joyce ï(2003). Examining the Five Stage e-Moderating Model: Designed and Emergent Practice in the Learning Technology Profession, Association for Learning Technology Journal, 11, 55--66. Martin Oliver and Gráinne Conole, Evaluating Communication and Information Technologies: a toolkit for practitioners, \emph{Active Learning} \textbf{8}, 3--8 Loïc Wacquant, ``Pierre Bourdieu'', \url{http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/3210/resources/PIERREBOURDIEU-KEYTHINK-REV2006.pdf} \chapter[\textbf{Learning To Learn}]{Learning To Learn} \below{By: Charlie Danoff} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics{./pictures/Jigoro_Kano_and_Kyuzo_Mifune-o.jpg} \scriptsize{from \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jigoro\_Kano\_and\_Kyuzo\_Mifune.jpg}{Wikipedia} (Public Domain)} \end{center} \end{figure} How can we learn to learn better? And how can we do it with others? If you put a blade to my (Charlie, author of this entry) throat, I'd say ``People and peers learn by doing. First there's the `baptism by fire' where awareness of how far away they are from their goal comes. If they have the social tools to survive that, then they have to endure the monotony of repeating the process over and over until the goal is realized. Even a shared journey of 10,000 miles begins with single steps.'' As a micro example, consider a study group I had for a nasty class in Neuropsychology. We convened at a library late one night to do well on the next day's test. We survived the ``baptism'' with distractions being: not showing up at the library at all; spending the time gossiping about college hook-ups; drinking; studying for another class; etc. We managed to keep our attention on the task at hand: appropriately prepping for tomorrow's test. We endured the monotony of studying for multiple hours, and then the goal was realized. A more drawn out analogy is a basketball team. Imagine they learned last season when they did not win the championship how far away they are from their goal. Then from training camp to the playoffs months later, they have to repeat the boring practice sessions they've implemented so hopefully they'll be playing well enough to win the title once the playoffs begin. This entry will be more meta than others, the ideas here apply to all forms of learning: including Peeragogy, Pedagogy and Andragogy. To start, let's ask ``What makes learning fun?''. \emph{Nota Bene:} this inquiry will be more art than science. What is it about learning how to make your skateboard float in the air for a split second that will motivate a teenager to invest hours of their time studying the mechanics of the trick, not to even mention the physical pain that comes with failure? Especially if that same student could not pay attention for more than 2 minutes at a time during Chemistry and spends less time than that trying their homework before giving-up? Why is learning skateboarding fun for her and chemistry not? Part of it relates to motivation. Skateboarding is most likely primarily intrinsically motivated, with some extrinsic motivation coming from the respect they'd receive from peers if they mastered the trick. Chemistry would be the reverse, mostly the motivation would be extrinsic, coming from parents and society's expectations that the student do well in their studies and get into a posh college, or their future will be doom. The student very well could be intrinsically motivated to have a high report card for their own vanity, but even then, chemistry is not done for the sake of learning chemistry, but because they need that high grade as part of their overall portfolio. Taken a different way, what is it about chemistry that's fun for those who love the science? Do they want the respect, power and prestige that comes from being the one to announce a new breakthrough? Or, is it akin to ``art for art's sake'' and they love doing chemistry just for the sake of doing it? Instead do they feel their work is important for the greater good, or prosperity, of humanity? That they are contributing, somehow? Perhaps more specifically, is it the act of learning that can be in, itself fun? Or is it the rewards that come from successfully applying said knowledge being studied that is fun? How would this apply, say, in the context of learning how to be intimate with your partner? Is that fun? One way to think about fun learning from Jürgen Schmidhuber is that it's fun to learn new patterns, as he wrote ``A separate reinforcement learner maximizes expected fun by finding or creating data that is better compressible in some yet unknown but learnable way, such as jokes, songs, paintings, or scientific observations obeying novel, unpublished laws.'' {[}1{]} So the skateboarder enjoyed coming across new patters (i.e. novel tricks) that they themselves could learn (that is, the tricks were not TOO far beyond their current skill level). Certainly learning is a highly personal endeavor and what works \emph{pour moi}, may hurt you in your studies. That understood between us, I will attempt an ad hoc list of what (I think) makes learning fun for me. I, and all of us here at the Peeragogy Handbook welcome your ideas. \begin{itemize} \item Learning something it is possible for me to understand. Even though it wasn't fun for me as a kid, I do now enjoy studying Japanese. The majority of the language is beyond me, but because I have a sound footing and confidence I can figure out the next step of what I do not know, it is usually fun. It's especially fun learning while drinking with colleagues in a bar, and less so sitting by myself trying to master hiragana. On the other side, while I would love to comprehend Galileo's ``The Assailer'' translated from Italian into Japanese both to show off my \emph{Nihonogo} skills and to see the skies better, sitting down to try and slog through the book alone does not sound like what I want to do after a day of work. \item Learning is ESPECIALLY fun if I'm studying something as a way to procrastinate from another assignment that is due. I have never been known to passively study accounting concepts in my free time, but you can be sure I will have fun learning some tangential fruit of the accounting tree, so long as its unrelated to the accounting exam I am cramming for tomorrow. \item Learning fun new Japanese words living in Japan was cool. It had value for me in my immediate reality. The idea of learning fun, new Japanese words has not motivated me much since I left. I think this concept is especially important to consider, given how our culture places so much value on the stark reality check students undergo moving from the world of school to the real world. I am not sure how to properly articulate this, but I believe this constantly preparing students for some unforeseeable, mysterious future as opposed to knowledge usable in their daily existence is not optimal. Certainly there are things necessary to learn for the real world, but I think students would be better served realizing whether you are in school or not they're part of the ``real world'' and should be learning helpful things in that vein. \end{itemize} It helps if learning is ``cool'' i.e. getting tips on how to navigate a snowboard down a hill was more fun for me than my Dad showing me the proper way to buff the car's leather seats as a child. There's also the learning that's fun, but only later. It was not fun in the moment for me to sit and make a 30 page reading journal for Frankenstein, or to re-write essays four times for my high-school English teacher. Now, though writing is fun for me and learning how to write better is fun because of those experiences. Perhaps for anything there's a certain pain threshold one has to endure to get the basics of a concept before learning it can be fun? And depending on the difficulty and/or how that threshold is reached (alone, with a peer, with a good teacher, with a bad teacher) determines for me whether or not that is fun? Yin to that yang, one obvious way learning becomes boring is if you are forced to do it. Whether by parents or society, being forced to do something, as opposed to choosing to, ends up making the individual less likely for success. Perhaps trying to figure out what makes learning fun is too difficult. Maybe there is no cut and dry, clear-cut answer. Either way, identifying what factors can make learning boring will be helpful. Could be that learning certain things is boring, no matter what, and that that is OK! Tangentially, why did some of the original masters of Judo, feel it would lose something if it were to become a competitive sport with scoring, as opposed to just a Japanese martial art? \begin{quotation} \emph{In 1899 a committee of the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai chaired by Jigoro Kano drew up the first formal set of rules for Judo contests. \ldots{} The first time judo was seen in the Olympic Games was in an informal demonstration hosted by Kano at the 1932 Games.} {[}3{]} \emph{ However, Kano was ambivalent about Judo's potential inclusion as an Olympic sport: `I have been asked by people of various sections as to the wisdom and possibility of Judo being introduced with other games and sports at the Olympic Games. My view on the matter, at present, is rather passive. If it be the desire of other member countries, I have no objection. But I do not feel inclined to take any initiative. For one thing, Judo in reality is not a mere sport or game. I regard it as a principle of life, art and science. In fact, it is a means for personal cultural attainment. Only one of the forms of Judo training, so-called randori or free practice can be classed as a form of sport. Certainly, to some extent, the same may be said of boxing and fencing, but today they are practiced and conducted as sports. Then the Olympic Games are so strongly flavored with nationalism that it is possible to be influenced by it and to develop 'Contest Judo', a retrograde form as ju-jitsu was before the Kodokan was founded. Judo should be free as art and science from any external influences, political, national, racial, and financial or any other organized interest. And all things connected with it should be directed to its ultimate object, the `Benefit of Humanity'. Human sacrifice is a matter of ancient history.'} {[}2{]} \end{quotation} Once something that used to be fun, early days of judo, becomes too rigid and formalized, scored judo in the Olympics, it can lose a lot of its luster for some folks. Whether it be fun or boring, for the purposes of this book our focus is on what makes it successful amongst peers. Within that idea I would like to briefly describe what David Foster Wallace's posthumous novel The Pale King had to say on boredom (spoiler alert). Early on as Sylvanshine, a high-level assistant within the IRS, is sitting on a plane we are treated to his stream-of-consciousness as he goes from fact-to-unrelated-fact (we later discover he is a fact psychic) spending a lot of time saying how much difficulty he has passing the CPA and the amusement that gives his colleagues. Succinctly, the narrator confides: ``What you pay attention to is the whole ball game in the CPA and in life.'' This idea percolates throughout the novel and comes out the end in the author's note's section with DFW's idea that if you can handle boredom you can do anything in modern life. This is related to a scene at a college accounting class where the character narrating at the time hears that ``in modern life there are no new worlds to discover or battles to be fought. Now it is time to account, and accounting is boring, and because of that those who can do it are heroes.'' {[}3{]} For context, Pale King is set on a day in 1985 at an Internal Revenue Service facility in Peoria, Illinois. In my mind, there are not too many more boring things in life than taxes and accounting. Yet, they are both invaluable parts of American society, without them it would not be going too far to say that our society would collapse. OK, so accounting is boring and important. How does fun play into that? Certainly there are some people born to be star IRS employees, for them, perhaps studying accounting is fun and therefore easy, or if not easy the challenge is part of the joy. What about others, like me? I recognize the value of accounting and want to learn it, but in my summer course on Managerial Accounting I got a D and am headed on the same track this term with Financial Accounting. Why is it that I am loathe to do the work? Part of it is a lack of consequence for doing badly. I have already completed a Bachelors degree, and while a CPA would be an invaluable feather in my cap, it is not necessary for employment, or for societal respect. Furthermore I am not paying for the courses myself, so I lack ``skin in the game'' if you will. Additionally I'm not a full-time student and have a life (i.e. work, friends, family, etc.) --- which gave me more to do than I could keep up with, even before I began my CPA quest. What am I trying to say by complaining and giving a lack of excuses? I'm trying to figure out why time and again I chose to invest my time in alternative pursuits, and not do my accounting homework. It's boring, yes. I felt I could get an A with very minimal effort, yes. Its too hard for me, I do not believe so but that is what the results indicate. So then what, I'm lazy and dumb? Perhaps, but maybe also I have not had the proper drive/hunger to complete this quest. I have the material; most of my exam grades have been B's and C's (plus I got an A in Intro to Accounting at The University of Chicago), yet … So, maybe accounting is boring because I can't just sit down and do it, like I can with writing or coding HTML. To successfully study accounting I, believe I, need to give it my full attention, on a daily (or at least 5X/weekly) basis. On both an individual and group level learning can be fun or boring, depending on the context. Whether it is fun or boring, learners need to take responsibility for it themselves if they want their dreams to come true. \paragraph{Notes} {[}1{]} \href{http://www.idsia.ch/\ensuremath{\sim}juergen/creativity.html}{http://www.idsia.ch/\ensuremath{\sim}juergen/creativity.html} {[}2{]} The Contribution of Judo to Education by Kano Jigoro (judoinfo.com) found via \emph{Judo}. (2012, May 20). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 04:59, May 23, 2012, from \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Judo\&oldid=493563588} Wikipedia \ldots{} Koizumi, Gunji (April 1947), ``1936 Conversation with Jigoro Kano'', Budokwai Bulletin found via Wikipedia 2012. {[}3{]} Pale King. 2012. David Foster Wallace. This article is an improved re-mix of the following short essays by me, Charlie, its author. \begin{itemize} \item \url{http://paragogy.net/index.php?title=Meta-learning\_as\_a\_font\_of\_knowledge\&oldid=439} \item \url{http://paragogy.net/index.php?title=What\_makes\_learning\_fun\%3F\&oldid=443} \item \url{http://paragogy.net/index.php?title=Paragogy\_Book\_D2\&oldid=735} \item \url{http://paragogy.net/index.php?title=What\_makes\_learning\_boring\&oldid=442} \end{itemize} \chapter[\textbf{Personal Learning Networks}]{Personal Learning Networks } \href{http://player.vimeo.com/video/15880455}{Shelly Terrell, Global Netweaver, Curator, PLN Builder} \paragraph{Summary} A. PLNs are the collections of people and information resources (and relationships with them) that people cultivate in order to form their own learning networks --- living, growing, responsive sourcses of information, support, and inspiration that support self-learners.. 1. PLNs can be as simple or complex as you would like to make them; using dashboards like \href{http://www.netvibes.com/en}{Netvibes}, RSS feeders like \href{http://www.google.com/reader}{Google Reader}, Bookmarking services like \href{http://www.diigo.com/}{Diigo}, \href{https://posterous.com/}{Posterous}, and \href{http://delicious.com/}{Delicious}, curating with services like \href{http://www.scoop.it/}{Scoop.it}, \href{http://www.pearltrees.com/}{Pearltrees}, or \href{http://www.curated.by/}{curated.by}, and finding people and sites of interest to you via Twitter, Facebook, Google+, and others. 2. Once you've put them together you have a connection of people, places, and data that allow you to learn, share and make the most of what's out on the Web that is relevant to you. Learning how to do that is key. Introducing \href{http://dmlcentral.net/blog/howard-rheingold/shelly-terrell-global-netweaver-curator-pln-builder}{his interview with PLN expert Shelly Terrell}, Howard Rheingold describes his experience: ``When I started using social media in the classroom, I looked for and began to learn from more experienced educators. First, I read and then tried to comment usefully on their blog posts and tweets. When I began to understand who knew what in the world of social media in education, I narrowed my focus to the most knowledgeable and adventurous among them. I paid attention to the people the savviest social media educators paid attention to. I added and subtracted voices from my attention network, listened and followed, then commented and opened conversations. When I found something I thought would interest the friends and strangers I was learning from, I passed along my own learning through my blogs and Twitterstream. I asked questions, asked for help, and eventually started providing answers and assistance to those who seemed to know less than I. The teachers I had been learning from had a name for what I was doing ---``growing a personal learning network.'' So I started looking for and learning from people who talked about HOW to grow a ``PLN'' as the enthusiasts called them. \paragraph{II. Mindmap for PLNs} \url{http://dmlcentral.net/blog/howard-rheingold/shelly-terrell-global-netweaver-curator-pln-builder} \paragraph{III. Cultivating your garden}A. Howard Rheingold's notes on \href{http://howardrheingoldsteachingnotes.posterous.com/notes-on-growing-a-personal-learning-network}{cultivating a PLN} \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics{./pictures/Personal-Learning-Network-900px-v2.jpeg} \end{center} \end{figure} \paragraph{Strong and weak ties} 1. Your PLN will have people and sites that you check on often - your main sources of information and learning - your `strong ties'. Your `weak ties' are those people and sites that you don't allow a lot of bandwidth or time. But they may become strong over time, as your network grows or your interests expand. 2. This is a two-way street - it is very important that you are sharing what you learn and discover with those in your network and not just taking, if you want to see your network expand. \paragraph{Articles and References} \begin{itemize} \item George Siemens \href{http://www.itdl.org/journal/jan\_05/article01.htm}{Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age} \item \href{http://dmlcentral.net/blog/howard-rheingold/shelly-terrell-global-netweaver-curator-pln-builder}{Shelly Terrell: Global Netweaver, Curator, PLN Builder} blog post, video \item Will Richardson and Rob Mancabelli, \href{http://weblogg-ed.com/2011/personal-learning-networks-an-excerpt/}{Personal Learning Networks: Using the Power of Connection to Transform Education} \item \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heutagogy}{Heutagogy} - The study of self-determined learning \item \href{http://delicious.com/hrheingold/pln}{Howard Rheingold's PLN links} \item Links to other articles in ths handbook: \href{http://peeragogy.org/connectivism-in-practice-how-to-organize-a-mooc/}{Connectivism in practice: How to MOOC,} Personal Learning Plans \end{itemize} \chapter[\textbf{Personal Learning Plan}]{ Personal Learning Plan } \below{By: Geoff Walker} \subsection{\emph{How does a Personal Learning Plan (PLP) relate to Peeragogy?}} Redecker et al., (2009) indicate that social networks give rise to innovation in teaching and learning by:\\ \begin{itemize} \item increasing the accessibility and availability of learning content;\\ providing new formats for knowledge dissemination, acquisition and management; \item allowing for the production of dynamic learning resources and environments of high quality and interoperability; \item embedding learning in more engaging and activating multimedia environments; \item supporting individualised learning processes by allowing learner preferences to be accounted for; \item equipping learners and teachers with versatile tools for knowledge exchange and collaboration, which overcome the limitations of face-to-face instruction. \end{itemize} So, examination of these six areas could reveal how a PLP for self-learning may be developed. When we refer to content in social networks, we are usually referring to User Generated Content (UGC). UGC is content generated by members of the network for other network members. UGC is often seen as `conversational media', but, it is often the case that `connectedness' is seen as more important than `conversation'. If we are to use conversational media appropriately and effectively we need to connect to content in ways in which the connection and the content combine to produce conversation: a kind of network triangulation. The micro-blog Twitter has become very effective in making such a triangulation. It is essential that learners have available and accessible content which reflects this triangulation and PLP need to demonstrate how this triangulation is taking place in any chosen social network. Each learner's learning is shaped by a variety of influences --- for example, family, cultural, peer, school, religious, local, and global influences. The PLP supports each learner to shape plans and to achieve success in education, the community, work and training. Through participation in the program of learning, each learner can build into his or her plan opportunities to: \begin{itemize} \item identify and develop his or her capabilities; \item consider and access the range of learning options available, both inside the curriculum and externally, to develop and achieve personal learning goals; \item interact with a range of people with relevant expertise, including teachers, peers, mentors, and employers; \item learn from experience how to develop, implement, review, adjust, and achieve his or her goals and to plan and make decisions accordingly. \end{itemize} \subsection{\emph{Designing and developing a PLP for self-learning}} A PLP is designed to develop a learner's learning and teaching capabilities. Learners learn how to develop, implement, review, and adjust personal learning goals. The PLP supports learners in developing knowledge and skills that will enable them to: 1. identify appropriate future options;2. review their strengths and areas for development;3. identify goals and plans for improvement;4. monitor their actions and review and adjust plans as needed to achieve their goals. \subsection{CASE STUDY: SUKDEV SINGH} Suk wants to improve his social networking skills. Where should he start as a self-learner? A PLP should be designed and developed which takes account of the four areas above. As a starting point, he needs to reflect on previous learning, in particular, to understand his learning style and how this can be applied to the self-learning process. An important starting point is to write a learning autobiography which illustrates learning-to-date and projects patterns of future learning. The autobiography should also include details of relevant qualifications and details of key skills. The next stage is to create a learning progression plan which could take the form of a timeline. This would show where Suk would like to be, in say, one month, three months, six months and a year. Suk should now map out a support network to underline the self-learning process. The network can include learning peers, professional colleagues, friends and relatives. Drawing upon learning style, past learning and projected patterns of learning, he needs to design and develop a timetable to programme his learning. A self-learning timetable should be divided into date, time, location and session with space for personal evaluation of each session. The PLP should also include a section for review and reflection and comments of this kind should be written in such a way that they can be shared for evaluation by both peers and mentors. \subsection{Three key steps to be followed when drafting an appropriate and effective PLP} \emph{Key Step 1 - Learning needs:}What do you most need to learn about in the time ahead?\emph{Key Step 2 - Learning activities:}What are the best ways you learn, what learning activities will meet your learning needs, what help will you need and how long will it take?\emph{Step 3 - Evidence of learning}:What will you put into your personal portfolio to demonstrate your learning progress and achievements? \subsection{\emph{Questions for Step 1: Figure out your learning needs }} KEY QUESTION: What do you most need to learn about in the time ahead? REMEMBER: \begin{enumerate} \item Build on any previous PLPs! \item Focus on areas of weakness and not only about the things you are good at! \item Think about all aspects of your work! \item Include things which will raise your confidence and self-esteem! \end{enumerate} ASK YOURSELF: \begin{enumerate} \item Is there any need outstanding from your last plan or recent events? \item What needs do I have arising from instances when my work has seemed difficult or less satisfactory? \item What do I need to learn about to feel confident and fulfilled? \end{enumerate} \textbf{Make a note of your most important learning needs, then proceed to step two.} \subsection{\emph{Questions for step 2: figure out suitable learning activities }} KEY QUESTION:What are the best ways you can learn, what learning activities will meet your learning needs, what help will you need and how long will it take?REMEMBER: \begin{enumerate} \item Build on past experiences and consider a wide range of activities! \item Pick the most appropriate activity for each need! \item Include activities you are already doing regularly! \item Be realistic about the time each activity will take and the help you will need! \end{enumerate} ASK YOURSELF: \begin{enumerate} \item How have I learnt best in the past, can I use methods which have worked well before? \item What learning methods and activities are readily available to me? \item Is the activity I have chosen appropriate? \item How can activities I am already involved in, and wish to continue with, be incorporated into my PLP? \item What help will I need and who will provide it? \end{enumerate} \textbf{Make a note of your chosen learning activities and number of hours you think each will take.} \subsection{\emph{Questions for Step 3: How will you demonstrate evidence of learning?}} KEY QUESTION:What will you put into your portfolio to demonstrate your learning progress and achievements?REMEMBER: \begin{enumerate} \item Think about your learning and how you will do things differently in future! \item Share some of the things you have learnt with your colleagues! \item Look for ways that your learning has actually benefited others! \item Organise the evidence you collect in a folder so that it can be presented when needed! \end{enumerate} ASK YOURSELF: \begin{enumerate} \item How will I show that I have benefited from my learning? \item How will I show that others have benefited? \end{enumerate} \textbf{Make a note of your ideas about what evidence to collect.} \chapter[\textbf{Play and Learning}]{ Play and Learning } \below{By: Bryan Alexander and Anna Keune} \emph{What does play have to do with peer learning? We can answer that question by thinking it through on different levels.} \paragraph{1. The individual plays and learns}There are deep links between play and learning for a single person. Consider, for instance, the way we learn the rules of a game through playing it. The first times we play a card game, or a physical sport, or a computer simulation we test out rule boundaries as well as our understanding. Actors and role-players learn their roles through the dynamic process of performance. The resulting learning isn't absorbed all at once, but accretes over time through an emergent process, one unfolding further through iterations. In other words, the more we play a game, the more we learn it.In addition to the rules of play, we learn about the subject which play represents, be it a strategy game (chess, for example) or simulation of economic conflict (\href{http://www.eveonline.com/}{Eve Online}). First, this is a function of art. We learn about an historical event through looking at paintings of it, watching representation movies, reading historical novels or nonfiction books, or - considering games as aesthetic objects - playing games about a topic. This representational function has been a significant aspect of gaming from Kriegspiel on; arguably, as far back as the conception of chess as statecraft tutorial. Second, the process of play reveals new dimensions to the subject, as different approaches and combinations display more subject content. Consider the end game of chess contrasted with the opening moves, or how successful video game players must learn to cope with ever-increasing challenges and capacities.At another level, beyond a game's rules and subject matter, play teaches us about ourselves. Playing games teaches us about our personal nature; play, in fact, can initiate change in a person (Vygotsky, 1966). When playing with others, be it Fantasy Football or World of Warcraft, we also learn social rules, from cultural knowledge to personality to teamwork mechanics. Think of the way young children play their way into knowledge of social rules and the physical world.Good games echo good teaching practice, too, in that they structure a single player's experience to fit their regime of competence (cf Vygotsky's zone of proximal learning, a la Gee (70)). That is to say a game challenges players at a level suited to their skill and knowledge: comfortable enough that play is possible, but so challenging as to avoid boredom, eliciting player growth. A video game example is the deep structure of levels, where players advance in stages of increasing difficulty, rising only as their competency grows. Role-playing in theater lets performers explore and test out concepts (Boal 1979).Further, adopting a playful attitude helps individuals meet new challenges with curiousity, along with a readiness to mobilize ideas and practical knowledge. Indeed, the energy activated by play can take a person beyond an event's formal limitations, as players can assume that play can go on and on. (Bereiter \& Scardamalia, 1993)``All systems of play are, at base, learning systems.'' (Thompson and Brown, 97) \paragraph{2. The group plays and learns together}Games have always had a major social component (Caillois, 2001; Huizinga, 1955), and learning plays a key role in that interpersonal function. Using games to build group cohesion is an old practice, actually a triusm in team sports. A similar truism is the way one learns an opponent by playing against them in chess. More recently we've seen rapid growth in learning simulations, such as the market in business games. Using play, or, more narrowly, games to build group learning follows naturally. This is a key form of peer learning.Vygotsky's zone of proximal development is based on groups, in that a learner is capable of greater performance with the support of more accomplished people. In fact, play can activatedevelopmental processes that are only internalized by an individual through peer interaction (see also e.g., Engeström, 2001). \paragraph{3. Play and learning in the world }It is important to locate our peeragogical moment in a world where gaming is undergoing a renaissance. Not only has digital gaming become a large industry, but gaming has begun to infiltrate non-gaming aspects of the world, sometimes referred to as ``gamification.''Putting all three of these levels together, we see that we can possibly improve co-learning by adopting a playful mindset. Such a playful attitude can then mobilize any or all of the above advantages. For example, \begin{itemize} \item Two friends are learning the Russian language together. They invent a vocabulary game: one identifies an object in the world, and the other must name it in Russian. They take turns, each challenging the other, building up their common knowledge. \item A middle-aged man decides to take up hiking. The prospect is somewhat daunting, since he's a very proud person and is easily stymied by learning something from scratch. So he adopts a ``trail name'', a playful pseudonym. This new identity lets him set-aside his self-importance and risk making mistakes. Gradually he grows comfortable with what his new persona learns. \item A girl decides she wants to care for animals, but doesn't have access to critters. She plays with a virtual pet, learning some of the concepts - feeding, care, monitoring. She then spots those concepts in play elsewhere in the world, through watching movies, her parents, and adults in her neighborhood. As her game play escalates in complexity, she finds these caring concepts in other systems, gradually extending her thinking and abilities. Eventually a family friend gifts her with a dog, and she is well positioned to start practicing what she's simulated in play. \end{itemize} Shifting ground, we can also consider the \textbf{design} field as a useful kind of playful peeragogy. It's an appropriate area for our purposes, as the design field has long been considered as a form of play, starting from roles (Schön, 1983). The person \emph{playing the role} of the designer can select the contextual frame within which the design is performed. This frame can be seen as the \emph{rules} governing the design, the artifact and the process. These rules, as with some games, may change over time. Therefore the possibility to adapt, to tailor one's activities to changing context is important when designing playful learning activities.This returns us to our third level of game-learning, noted above, ``play and learning in theworld''. As the ``cultural memory'' of a person grows in broad social contexts, along with it the forms of memory that can be accessed (Luria, 1930), learning activities need to adapt. They need to be open enough to extend side-by-side with changing practice (Fischer \& Scharff 2000) in order to accommodate its advancing needs (Fischer, 2003).All of this potential creativity naturally elicits the question of \textbf{assessment}. How can we measure and validate learning in such unconventional settings? The contrast between metrics and the ludic impulse is strong. And yet play often already contains assessment's seeds through rules and structures. Most games, after all, provide metrics for measuring game progress: points, position on a board, markers of status, and so on. We can repurpose these structures for broader assessment since they provide clear and meaningful feedback to players, as the gamification movement has argued (Mcgonigal). Moreover, insofar as play involves the use and/or creation of media, we can assess play as media work. Other players can look for argument and ideas in selected works, or trace another player's growth through mediated play over time.Balancing the needs of assessment and play requires some finesse and tact. The spirit of each appears diametrically opposed to the other, at times. Moreover, play can elicit competition, which does not necessarily redound to mutual benefit for players. Griefing, aggression, cut-throat tactics, defections (in the sense of game theory) can lead to players not only exceeding colleagues' play, but actively undermining their performance. Perhaps these problems of comparison and measurement would benefit from a gamification approach. Assessment often seems deliberate, opposed to the spontaneity we know imbues play; creating a subgame of assessment might satisfy both sides of this opposition. \paragraph{Exercises} \begin{itemize} \item Use the \href{http://www.rtqe.net/ObliqueStrategies/}{Oblique Strategies} card deck (Brian Eno and Peter Schmidt, 1st edition 1975) to spur playful creativity. Each card advises players to change up their creative process, often in surprising directions. \item Take turns making and sharing videos. This online collaborative continuous video storytelling involves a group of people creating short videos, uploading them to YouTube, then making playlists of results. Similar to \href{http://clipkino.info/}{Clip Kino}, only online. \item Engage in theater play using Google+ Hangout. e.g. coming together with a group of people online and performing theatrical performances on a shared topic that are recorded. \item Pick a computer game which embodies some part of what you want to learn. \item Do the same for a non-digital game. \item Adopt a wildly creative persona as your learning identity. See how their biography grows. \end{itemize} \subsection{References} Beardon, C., 2002. Digital Bauhaus: aesthetics, politics and technology. Digital Creativity, 13 4{]}, pp.169--179.Boal, A., 1979. Theatre of the oppressed. 3rd ed. London: Pluto Press. Bereiter, C. and Scadamalia, M., 1993. Surpassing ourselves, an inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Peru, Illinois: Open Court. Roger Caillois, \emph{Man, Play, and Games}. Trans. Meyer Barash. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2001 Engestroem, Y., 2001. Expansive Learning at Work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14{[}1{]}, pp.133--156. doi:10.1080/13639080020028747 Fischer, G. and Schaff, E., 2000. Meta-Design: design for designers. In: 3rd conference on designing interactive systems {[}DIS '00{]}. New York:ACM. pp.396--405. doi:10.1145/347642.347798 Fischer, G., 2003. Meta-Design: beyond user-centered and participatory design. In: HCI International 2003. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp.88--92 Available at: \url{http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.6.8238} Johan Huizinga, \emph{Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture}. Boston: Beacon, 1955 Luria, A. R., 1930. Mastery of tools. In: Ape, primitive man, and child: essays in the history of behaviour, A.R. Luria and L.S. Vygotsky. Translated by E. Rossiter, 1992. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Available at: \url{http://www.marxists.org/archive/luria/works/1930/child/ch07.htm} Jane Mcgonigal, Reality is Broken. New York: Penguin, 2011. \href{http://www.sffaudio.com/?p=38223}{One recent story} about Mitch Resnick and the role of play in children's learning (\href{http://www.legobuildersoftomorrow.com/podcast1.mp3}{direct link to mp3}). Schoen, D., 1983. The reflective practitioner, how professionals think in action. New York, NY. Basic Books. Douglas Thomas and John Seely Brown, A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change. CreateSpace, 2011. Vygotsky, L. S.,1978. The interaction between learning and development. In: M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner and E. Souberman, eds. 1978. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp.79--91. Vygotsky, L. S., 1933. Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Translated by C. Mulholland, 1966. In: Voprosy psikhologii, 6. {[}online{]} Available at: \url{http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1933/play.htm} {[}Accessed 30 October 2011{]}. %% Nice trick! \begin{center}\rule{3in}{0.4pt}\end{center} \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/initial-rough-outline\#comment-1618}{Link to forum discussion}. \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/initial-outline-source-book}{Link to outline page}. \chapter[\textbf{``Learning on the Job''}]{ Informal Learning in the Workplace} \textbf{Summary}: Peeragogy takes a different shape in the corporation. It's driven by the need to do something, not just to learn about it. \href{http://vimeo.com/45989903}{Workplace Learning 2} from \href{http://vimeo.com/user7021511}{Jay Cross} on \href{http://vimeo.com}{Vimeo}. \section{Peeragogy in the Corporate Setting} \subsection{From training to learning} A DOZEN years ago, the words \emph{training} and \emph{learning} were interchangeable, but today \emph{learning} is revered and \emph{training} is in the dog house. What's the difference? Training is something that's pushed on you; someone else is in charge. Learning is something you choose to do, whether you're being trained or not. You're in charge. Many knowledge workers will tell you, ``I love to learn, but I hate to be trained.'' Learning is in keeping with the democratization of the workplace spawned by the network revolution. Decision making is passing from the manager to the worker, and part of the deal is that learning is crowding out training. Corporations are shifting from top-down training to self-directed learning, from ``push'' to ``pull.'' However, most of that learning is extremely pragmatic: the purpose is learning to \emph{do} something as opposed to learning \emph{about} something. However, many corporations would bypass learning altogether if they could. Executives typically don't want learning; they want \emph{execution.} They want the job done. They want \emph{performance. }To a business manager, learning is a means to an end. If someone were to invent a smart pill that enabled workers to excel at their jobs without training, that person would make a fortune marketing smart pharmaceuticals, and most trainers would be out of work. Conversely, workers often learn more in the coffee room than in the classroom. They discover how to do their jobs through experience: talking, observing others, trial and error, and simply working with people in the know. Formal learning—classes and workshops—conveys only 5 to 20 percent of what people learn at work. Informal learning is generally more effective and less expensive than its formal counterpart. Corporations traditionally over-invest in formal training programs while neglecting natural, simpler informal processes. People in corporations already do most of their learning informally, but they do it unconsciously and without much support. It's haphazard. The notion of Peeragogy can make this informal, experiential learning more visible and help improve the informal learning process. Learning is not schooling. Forget about classes and courses and grades and tests and all the other school-related paraphernalia we push on children. Most of what we learn, we learn from other people—parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, playmates, cousins, Little Leaguers, Scouts, school chums, roommates, teammates, classmates, study groups, coaches, bosses, mentors, colleagues, gossips, co-workers, neighbors, and our kids. Sometimes we even learn from teachers. Informal learning is effective because it is personal. The individual calls the shots. The learner is responsible. It's real. How different from formal learning, which is imposed by someone else. How many learners believe the subject matter of classes and workshops is ``the right stuff''? How many feel the corporation really has their best interests at heart? \subsection{Inspire, don't command} To extract optimal performance from workers, managers must inspire them rather than command them. Antoine de Saint-Exup\'ery put it nicely: ``If you want to build a boat, do not instruct the men to saw wood, stitch the sails, prepare the tools and organize the work, but make them long for setting sail and travel to distant lands.'' Today's free-range learners are knowledge workers. They expect the freedom to connect the dots for themselves. Imagine the difference between a free-range (informal) learner and a (formal) high school student. The high school student is not allowed to take notes, books, or a cell phone into the room for the final exam on which their future rides. Happily for us all, life is unlike high school. It is no longer useful to define learning as what someone is able to do all on his or her lonesome. Life is not the same as \emph{Survivor.} Knowledge workers of the future will have instant, ubiquitous access to the Net. The measure of their learning is an open-book exam. ``What do you know?'' is replaced with ``What can you do?'', which is in the process of being supplanted by, ``What can you and your network connections do?'' Knowledge itself is moving from the individual to the Net. And peeragogy is supplanting pedagogy. \subsection{Self-directed, informal learning, in practice} Corporate culture resists sharing control of learning with learners. Staid executives recoil at terms like \emph{self-directed} or \emph{informal} because they imply things are ``out of control.'' This is an issue of trust. If an executive does not trust workers, informal can mean \emph{lackadaisical.} However, when executives trust workers, informal means \emph{natural} and \emph{unconstrained}. No matter what we call it, people learn best when they: • Know what's in it for them and deem it relevant • Understand what's expected of them • Connect with other people • Are challenged to make choices • Feel safe about showing what they do and do not know • Receive information in small packets • Get frequent progress reports • Learn things close to the time they need them • Are encouraged by coaches or mentors • Learn from a variety of modalities (for example, discussion followed by a simulation) • Confront maybes instead of certainties • Teach others • Get positive reinforcement for small victories • Make and correct mistakes • Try, try, and try again • Reflect on their learning and apply its lessons \subsection{Learning on demand instead of learning just in case} Learning things in advance, ``just in case,'' is a losing game. Until the case arrives, the worker suspects the subject matter won't be relevant. And when the case does come along, the knowledge acquired in advance is probably long gone. Knowledge, like muscle tissue, deteriorates when it's not used. But learning something at the moment of need couples learning closely with application, and has lasting effects. When you cannot predict the future and emergence is unpredictable, you can't build training programs in advance because you don't know what you'll need. Those who are charged with developing an organization's talent must rise above the level of training programs. Static programs do not fare well in a dynamic world. Instead, we should focus on setting the right conditions for learning. Sometimes there will be a course thrown in; at other times, a loose collective exercise will prompt learning, and often managers and trainers can just get out of the way and let learning happen on its own. \subsection{Overcoming Stockholm Syndrome} Bank employees were held hostage for six days by robbers of Kreditbanken in Stockholm, Sweden, in September of 1973. The hostages became emotionally attached to their captors and defended them after being released. About 27\% of victims succumb to what's now called Stockholm Syndrome. When it comes to learning, many workers suffer from Stockholm syndrome. They're accustomed to putting their minds on hold, relinquishing control to their trainers. They leave their curiosity at the door. They prefer spoon-feeding to foraging on their own. Some consider workshops the ideal environment for catching up on email; others treat an off-site meeting as a mini-vacation. Of course, there are also some great training experiences, some masterful instructors, and diligent students --- but not enough. Put in the sway of trainers, most workers passively wait for instructions. Escaping Stockholm Syndrome in this case requires new skills and attitudes. The attitudes come from a collaborative culture that values optimism, self-confidence, curiosity, resilience, purpose, and autonomy. The Internet Time Group is currently researching the skills required by self-directed learners. Their list thus far: • learning how to learn • critical thinking \& conceptualization • pattern recognition \& making meaning • design thinking • working with one another, co-creation • navigating complex environments • software literacy \subsection{Summary and Conclusion} How might this work in a concrete case? If I were an instructional designer in a moribund training department, I'd polish up my resume and head over to marketing. Co-learning can differentiate services, increase product usage, strengthen customer relationships, and reduce the cost of hand-holding. It's cheaper and more useful than advertising. Were I that instructional designer, I'd consider tweaking what Google recently did with their Power Searching course. Almost all of the interaction in that course took the form of top-down delivery from Dan Russell. The Hangouts on Google+ had a lot in common with most of today's educational practice: I answer the question, you answer the question, hundreds of other people answer the same question. There's no interaction and no camaraderie. Perhaps a future courses would do more to encourage collaboration in, and competition among, ad hoc teams\ldots{} or at least a leader board that awards the most sophisticated searchers. Again, the emphasis should always be on learning in order to do something! \subsection{Recommended Reading} My colleague Jane Hart has posted a parallel list of what's required from BYO Learners (who support Bringing Your Own Learning). Hart, Jane. Is it time for a BYOL (Bring Your Own Learning) strategy for your organization? \url{http://www.c4lpt.co.uk/blog/2012/04/20/is-it-time-for-a-byol-bring-your-own-learning-strategy-in-your-organization-byol/} \subsection{References} Cross, Jay. Informal Learning Center. \url{http://www.jaycross.com/wp/?portfolio=informal-learning} \chapter[\textbf{Researching p\ae ragogy}]{ Researching p\ae ragogy } Up to now, \emph{paragogy} has been a mostly ad hoc collection of advice, based nonetheless on experience (see the brief history in \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/organizing-a-learning-context}{Organizing a Learning Context}) --- and \emph{peeragogy} similarly. Although the two inflections of this concept differ slightly in their orientation, without a doubt, the current handbook has mostly offered ``advice for practitioners'' --- people who are either ``doing p\ae ragogy'' in some form or another, or who would like to start experimenting with it. This section addresses ``researcher practitioners'', and specifically, it will look at the ways in which ``technology'' (broadly construed) intersects with, or can intersect with, the \emph{theory} \emph{and practice} of p\ae ragogy. For example: we have claimed that ``learning is distributed and nonlinear'' --- but can we detect learning when it is happening? (How do we know it is happening, if we can't detect it?) I'll connect the paragogical principles to some relevant technologies (in this case, instruments), and also say something about the related learning applications. After that, I will outline some potential experiments of interest. \textbf{Principle 1}: \emph{Changing context as a decentered center.} We interact by changing the space. \emph{A relevant technology would}: Detect ``similar'' or ``related'' texts: model an ``effective'' context by \emph{building} the working context. \emph{Application}: I can bring relevant texts into my line of sight when I am working on a particular problem. (Cf. Vannevar Bush, ``\href{http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/3881/}{As We May Think}''.) \textbf{Principle 2}: \emph{Meta-learning as a font of knowledge.} We interact by changing what we know about ourselves. \emph{A relevant technology would}: Detect vocabulary acquisition: model a learner as Vocabulary X Time, or better still, as a ``subgraph'' of the graph of available knowledge --- showing functional skills (see Principle 4). \emph{Application}: I can keep track of the \emph{information} I'm ``learning''. \textbf{Principle 3}: \emph{Peers provide feedback that wouldn't be there otherwise.} We interact by changing our perspective on things. \emph{A relevant technology would}: Detect styles of engagement: model social behavior like ``asking for, giving, or getting help''. \emph{Application}: I know who might make a good mentor, tutee, or conversation or collaboration partner for me. \textbf{Principle 4}: \emph{Learning is distributed and nonlinear.} We interact by changing the way things connect. \emph{A relevant technology would}: Detect changes in the underlying ``graph'' of related concepts and structures: this, of course, requires a context in which we can model the context as a graph. \emph{Application}: This is a ``basic building block'' for some of the other things we would like to detect, but it also shows where collective knowledge is being built, and can help people find ``research frontiers'' or ``hotspots''. \textbf{Principle 5}: \emph{Realize the dream if you can, then wake up!} We interact by changing our objectives. \emph{A relevant technology would}: Detect the use and mastery of heuristics: model the ways of thinking that go into creating a given text, and model participants as agents who are able to employ various ways of thinking. \emph{Application}: I can keep track of the \emph{techniques} I'm learning, and also keep track of what \emph{doesn't} work. This does not yet say how we will \emph{implement} the various technologies sketched or alluded to above, but in a few words: most if not all of them can be built using a standard programming language and some text-processing techniques, supported where relevant by a metadata system (e.g. an RDF triple store). Other ingredient would be existing semantic networks describing the English language (i.e. Wordnet) and domain knowledge repositories that can be turned into semantic networks (e.g. PlanetMath.org). When we have some of these tools in place, we can start running experiments. The next subsection describes some potential experiments of interest. \section{Proposed Experiments} \textbf{Question A}. Which activites have the biggest payoff for learners, in terms of our learning model? \emph{Hypothesis}: A study plan that puts learners into contact with new concepts and techniques in such a way that they are not overwhelmed, and yet are continually challenged. (Basically the ``Zone of Proximal Development''.) E.g., in math, solving progressively harder problems (and going back to easier problems when you get stuck). \emph{Experiment}: Look at different interaction histories and ``add up'' the concepts learned and the heuristics used. We will want to find a way to distinguish between ``rehearsing'' prior knowledge, and really learning something new. There are some features of social interaction (e.g. asking a question) that we can use to guess how much people know in advance. \textbf{Question B}. Is the learning model a good model? \emph{Hypothesis:} The quality of the learning model will be determined by the quality of our underlying representation of ``domain knowledge'', and the quality of our text mining tools. \emph{Experiment}: One possible approach: If we have a computer-based platform that can support ``standard'' coursework, and a teacher who is willing to run the course using this experimental software, then we can see whether our learning model predicts ``traditional'' measures of success in the course. (This could be done, retroactively, with data from, e.g., the Stanford AI course.) \textbf{Question C}. Which interventions have the biggest payoff for our system? \emph{Hypothesis}: Once the research technologies from the previous two steps are solidly in place, we can generate a \emph{lot} of hypotheses, i.e. we should be able to use this methodology to test out a wide range of future interventions. \emph{Experiment}: Make the given intervention, and measure the total impact on learning across the site, using a method similar to Experiment A (but now, summing across all participants). ``Question A'' poses some further difficulties - how do we know what constitutes ``an activity''? (See ``\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/planning-learning-activities}{Planning Learning Activities}''.) Certainly, we will be able to detect ``basic actions'' in any system, but it is usually sustained or repeated actions that comprise ``an activity'' --- or, perhaps better, a strategy. If the knowledge resource describes the underlying ``heuristics'' (i.e. strategies or \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/patterns-and-use-cases}{patterns}!) \emph{quite well} in terms of their constituent actions, then this part will be well taken care of. In any event, one facet of the research program is to try and capture the structure of the relevant underlying activities. \section{Discussion} We could critique the above by saying that it may work well for spaces that have a detailed and structured knowledge-oriented ``base''. Mathematics would be a good example of a field like that --- and history or philosophy, probably, a fairly bad example. Nevertheless, without going to the full extreme of \emph{actually} building the sort of learning-detection system envisaged above, we can still think about how it ``might'' work in more informal, less rigid, contexts. For example, we might try and ``eyeball'' participation in the peeragogy forum itself, according to the framework sketched above. Some participants have self-reported on what they have learned here, and how they have learned it (see \href{https://peeragogy.etherpad.mozilla.org/7}{this etherpad}). Furthermore, we have a ``learning model'' in the form of our Concept Map (or at least the sub-map comprised of patterns and anti-patterns). We could check to see whether the self-reported learning has anything to do with how much we (as individuals and as a group) successfully implement the patterns and avoid implementing the anti-patterns. This would require fairly labor intensive hand-coding, but it should show the at-least-in-principle, broader applicability of the \emph{research outlines} proposed above. Another possible critique is that the technology-oriented approach here is not sufficiently ``bracketed''. In fact, I don't think so (see e.g. comments \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/node/641/talk}{here}). The paragogical approach to technology is different from the ``modernist'' approach. Technology is not separate or ``elevated''. Rather, we have used the word ``technology'' in an attempt to talk about some functional features of the way learning works in practice. \part{Convening A Group} \chapter{Getting together} \below{By: Gigi Johnson, Joe Corneli, and others} So you really want to try peer to peer learning? Maybe you already found a few others who will support you in this effort? Congratulations! It's time now to focus your thinking --- how will you convene a suitable group? How will you design a learner experience which will make your project thrive? In this chapter we suggest a variety of questions that will help you to make your project more concrete for potential new members. There are no good or bad answers -- it depends on the nature of your project and the context. Trying to answer the questions is not something you do just once -- at various stages of the project, some or all of those questions will get new meanings -- and probably new answers. \begin{quotation} \emph{``There is a force of attraction that allows aggregation into groups based on: the degree of personal interest; the ability to enhance and improve the share of each participant; the expectation of success and potential benefit.''} --- \href{http://campus.ftacademy.org/community/mod/groups/topicposts.php?topic=10060\&group\_guid=8500}{Fabrizio Terzi} \end{quotation} \section{Who are ``we''?} Note that there are many groups that may not need to be ``convened'', since they already exist. There is a good story from \href{http://www.sarvodayausa.org/learn/a-t-ariyartne/}{A. T. Ariyaratne} \href{http://www.sarvodaya.org/about/philosophy/collected-works-vol-1/rural-self-help}{here} in which he does ``convene'' a natural group (namely, a village) - but in any case, keep in mind at the outset that the degree of group-consciousness that is necessary for peer learning to take place is not fixed. Here we suppose you (whoever you are!) are just at the point of kicking off a project. What should you do? We suggest you take a moment to ponder the following questions first! \section[The 5 W's and How]{The 5 W's and How, and SIX clusters of Very Good Questions} Those taking the initiative should ask themselves a quick traditional who, what, where, when, why, and how. (Simon Sinek suggests to begin with Why, and we touched on ``Who'' above!). In doing so, preliminary assumptions for design and structure are established. However, in peer learning it is particularly important to maintain a healthy degree of openness, so that future group members can also form their answers on those questions. In particular, this suggests that the design and structure of the project (and the group) may change over time. Here, we riff on the traditional 5W's+H with \emph{\textbf{6 clusters of Very Good Questions} --- }which will help you focus your thinking about the project. \textbf{Expectations for participants} \begin{enumerate} \item Do you see an initial ``division of labor'' that would suggest the formation of teams or task groups? \item What are some of the roles that people are likely to fall into (e.g. Newcomer, Wrapper, Lurker, Aggregator, etc.)? \item How likely is it that participants will stick with the project? If you expect many participants to leave, how will this effect the group and the outcome? \item Do you envision new people joining the group as time goes by? If so, what features are you designing that will support their integration into an existing flow? \item Will the project work if people ``dip in and out''? If so, what features support that? If not, how will people stay focused? \end{enumerate} \textbf{Nature of the project} \begin{enumerate} \item What skills are required? What skills are you trying to build? \item What kinds of change will participants undergo? Will they be heading into new ground? Changing their minds about something? Learning about learning? \item What ``social'' or ``productive'' (etc.) objective, if any, is the project aiming to achieve? \end{enumerate} \textbf{Time management} \begin{enumerate} \item What do you expect the group to do, from the moment it convenes, to the end of its life-span, to create the specific outcome that will exist at the conclusion of its last meeting? (C. Gersick.) Note that what people ACTUALLY do may be different from what you envision at the outset, so you may want to revisit this question (and your answer) again as the project progresses. \item Keeping in mind that at least one period of is inertia is very likely (C. Gersick), what event(s) do you anticipate happening in the group that will bring things back together, set a new direction, or generally get things on track? More generally, what kinds of contingencies does your group face? How does it interface to the ``outside world''? \item What pre-existing narratives or workflows could you copy in your group? \item How much of a time commitment do you expect from participants? Is this kind of commitment realistic for members of your group? \item What, if anything, can you do to make participation ``easy'' in the sense that it happens in the natural flow of life for group members? \item Does everyone need to participate equally? How might non-equal participation play out for participants down the line? \end{enumerate} \textbf{Thinking backwards} \begin{enumerate} \item What structures will support participants in their journey to the end result(s) you (or they) have envisioned? What content can you use to flesh out this structure? \item Where can the structure ``flex'' to accomodate unknown factors as things progress?\textbf{} \end{enumerate} \textbf{Parameters of tool/platform choice} \begin{enumerate} \item What tools are particularly suited to this group? Consider features like past experience, the need for centralization (or de-centralization), cultural expectations related to group work, sharing, and leadership, etc. \item Is there an inherent ``draw'' to this project for a given population, or are you going to have to do a lot of work to keep people involved? How might your answer influence your choice of tools? \item How do you prioritize ``easy entry'', ``diverse uses'', and ``high ceilings for sophisticated expansion''? \item Unless you are working with an existing group, or re-using an existing modalitiy, participation is not a habit for anyone here. What's the ``hook''? \end{enumerate} \textbf{(Non-)Linearity vs Messiness} \begin{enumerate} \item How will your group manage feedback in a constructive way? \item Why might participants feel motivated to GIVE feedback? \item How firm are the ``social contracts'' for this group? How extensively do they apply? (Do they apply to everyone equally, or are some ``more equal than others''?) \item What do people need to know at the start? What can you work out as you go along? Who decides? \item How welcome are ``meta-discussions''? What kinds of discussions are not likely to be welcome? Do you have facilities in place for ``breakout groups'' or other peer-to-peer interactions? (Alternatively, if the project is mostly distributed, do you have any facilities in place for coming together as a group?) \end{enumerate} \section{A couple additional questions} \textbf{Cycles of group development } The above questions remain important thoughout the life of the project. People may come and go, particpants may propose fundamentally new approaches, people may evolve from lurkers to major content creators or vice versa. The questions we suggest can be most effective if your group discusses them over time, as part of its workflow, using synchronous online meetings (e.g., \href{http://www.bigbluebutton.org/}{Big Blue Button}, \href{http://success.adobe.com/en/na/sem/products/connect/1109\_6011\_connect\_webinars.html?sdid=IEASO\&skwcid=TC\%7C22191\%7Cadobe\%20connect\%7C\%7CS\%7Ce\%7C5894715262}{Adobe Connect}, \href{http://www.blackboard.com/platforms/collaborate/overview.aspx}{Blackboard Collaborate}), forums, Google docs, wikis, and/or email lists. Regular meetings are one way to establish a ``Heartbeat'' for the group. In thinking about other ways of structuring things, note that the ``body'' of the peeragogy.org website follows a \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forming-storming-norming-performing}{Tuckman-like outline} (i.e. \emph{Convening a Group} is similar to ``forming'', \emph{Organizing a Learning Context} is similar to ``storming and norming'', \emph{Co-working/Facilitation} is similar to ``performing'', and \emph{Assessment} is similar to ``adjourning''. But, that said, we generally agree with Gersick (and Engeström) that groups do not always follow a linear or cyclical pattern! Nevertheless, there may be some particular stages or phases that you want \emph{your} group to go through! Do you need some ``milestones'', for example? How will you know when you've achieved ``success''? Etc. \textbf{Chaos, or conflict?} In closing, it is worth reminding you that it is natural for groups to experience conflict, especially as they grow or cross other threshold points or milestones\ldots{} or perhaps more likely, when they DON'T cross important milestones in a timely fashion (ah, so you remember those milestones from the previous section!). Nevertheless, there are some strategies can be used to make this conflict productive, rather than merely destructive. Consider the range of possibilities expressed in this quote: \begin{quotation} \emph{In this research, a neutral approach is taken to conflict in order to explore the concept openly and thereby avoid bias. In general conflict has the potential to result in resolution, compliance, fragmentation and drop-outs; and possible outcomes of conflict in learning can be {[}learning{]} about {[}the{]} learning orientation of the students, {[}revitalized participation: or{]} chaos.} --- Ozturk and Simsek, ``Of Conflict in Virtual Learning Communiities in the Context of a Democratic Pedagogy: A paradox or sophism?'', in \emph{Proceedings of the Networked Learning Conference, 2012, Maastricht.} \end{quotation} \textbf{References} Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen \& R.-L-. Punamäki (Eds.), \emph{Perspectives on activity theory}, (pp. 377--404). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press Gersick, C. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. \emph{Academy of Management Journal} 31 (Oct.): 9--41. doi:\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.2307\%2F256496}{10.2307/256496} Mimi Ito's observations of manga groups co-learning Japanese: \url{http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/full\_pdfs/hanging\_out.pdf} Rheingold U Mindamp groups: \url{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/mindamp5/lockedwiki/main-page} Shneiderman, B. (2007). Creativity support tools: accelerating discovery and innovation. \emph{Commun. ACM} 50, 12 (December 2007), 20--32. doi:10.1145/1323688.1323689, \url{http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1323688.1323689} Tomlinson, B., Ross, J., Andr\'e, P., Baumer, E.P.S., Patterson, D.J., Corneli, J., Mahaux, M., Nobarany, S., Lazzari, M., Penzenstadler, B., Torrance, A.W., Callele, D.J., Olson, G.M., Silberman, M.S., Ständer, M., Palamedi, F.R., Salah, A., Morrill, E., Franch, X., Mueller, F., Kaye, J., Black, R.W., Cohn, M.L., Shih, P.C., Brewer, J., Goyal, N., Näkki, P., Huang, J., Baghaei, N., and Saper, C., Massively Distributed Authorship of Academic Papers, \emph{Proceedings of Alt.Chi, Austin Texas, May 5---10 2012} (10 page extended abstract), ACM, 2012, \url{http://altchi.org/submissions/submission\_wmt\_0.pdf} David de Ugarte, Phyles. Summary: \url{http://david.lasindias.com/phyles/} Book: \url{http://deugarte.com/gomi/phyles.pdf} Scheidel, T. M., \& Crowell, L. (1964). Idea development in small discussion groups. \emph{Quarterly Journal of Speech}, 50, 140--145. Scheidel, T. M., \& Crowell, L. (1979), \emph{Discussing and Deciding - A Desk Book for Group Leaders and Members}, Macmillan Publishing \textbf{See also:}A specific walkthough of this sort of idea in the context of a MOOC: \url{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/connectivism-practice-how-organize-a-mooc} \part{Organizing a Learning Context} \chapter{What is your context?} This section about organizing Co-Learning rests on the assumption that learning always happens in a context, whether this context is a structured ``course'' or a (potentially) less structured ``learning space''. For the moment we consider the following division: \begin{itemize} \item \emph{Organizing Co-learning Contexts} \begin{itemize} \item Courses (= ``learning linked to a timeline or syllabus'') \item Spaces (= ``learning not necessarily linked to a timeline or syllabus'') \end{itemize} \end{itemize} This section focuses on existing learning contexts and examines in detail how they have been ``organized'' by their (co-)creators. (See also: \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/structural-dimensions-the-what-we-are-learning-vs-time-and-types-structures}{the structural dimensions of group formation}.) At a ``meta-level'' of media, we can talk about this parallel structure: \begin{itemize} \item \emph{Building Co-learning Platforms} \begin{itemize} \item Development trajectories (e.g. ``design, implement, test, repeat'') \item Platform features (e.g. forums, wikis, ownership models, etc.) \end{itemize} \end{itemize} A given learning environment with have both time-like and space-like features as well as both designed-for and un-planned features. A given learning platform will encourage certain types of engagement and impose certain constraints. The question for both ``teachers'' and ``system designers'' --- as well as for learners --- should be: \emph{what features best support learning?} The answer will depend on the learning task and available resources. For example, nearly everyone agrees that the best way to learn a foreign language is through immersion. But not everyone who wants to learn, say, French, can afford to drop everything to go live in a French-speaking country. Thus, the space-like full immersion ``treatment'' is frequently sacrificed for course-like treatments (either via books, CDs, videos, or ongoing participation in semi-immersive discussion groups). System designers are also faced with scarce resources: programmer time, software licensing concerns, availability of peer support, and so forth. While the ideal platform would (magically) come with solutions pre-built, a more realistic approach recognizes that problem solving always takes time and energy. The problem solving approach and associated ``learning orientation'' will also depend on the task and resources at hand. The following sections will develop this issue further through some specific case studies. \subsection{\emph{Case study 1 (pilot, completed)}: ``Paragogy'' and the After Action Review.} In our analysis of our experiences as course organizers at P2PU, we (Joe Corneli and Charlie Danoff) used the US Army's technique of After Action Review (AAR). To quote from \href{http://paragogy.net/ParagogyPaper2}{our paper} {[}2{]}: \begin{quote} As the name indicates, the AAR is used to review training exercises. It is important to note that while one person typically plays the role of evaluator in such a review {[}\ldots{}{]} the review itself happens among peers, and examines the operations of the unit as a whole.The four steps in an AAR are: \begin{enumerate} \item Review what was supposed to happen (training plans). \item Establish what happened. \item Determine what was right or wrong with what happened. \item Determine how the task should be done differently the next time. \end{enumerate} The stated purpose of the AAR is to ``identify strengths and shortcomings in unit planning, preparation, and execution, and guide leaders to accept responsibility for shortcomings and produce a fix.'' \end{quote} We combined the AAR with several principles (see Discussion section below), which we felt described effective peer learning, and went through steps 1--4 for each principle to look at how well it was implemented at P2PU. This process helped generate a range of advice that could be applied at P2PU or similar institutions. By presenteding our paper at the \href{http://okfn.org/okcon/}{Open Knowledge Conference (OKCon)}, we were able to meet P2PU's executive director, Philipp Schmidt, as well as other highly-involved P2PU participants; our feedback may have contributed to shaping the development trajectory for P2PU. In addition, we developed a strong prototype for constructive engagement with peer learning that we and others could deploy again. In other words, variants on the AAR and the paragogical principles could be incorporated into future learning contexts as platform features {[}3{]} or re-used in a design/administration/moderation approach {[}4{]}. For example, we also used the AAR to help structure our writing and subsequent work on \href{http://paragogy.net}{paragogy.net}. \subsection{\emph{Case Study 2 (in progress)}: ``Peeragogy''.} Our particular focus in the interviews was on drawing out and emphasizing the relational dimension of students, learning experiences within their environment and, consequently, on inferring from their accounts a sense of how they perceived and indeed constituted their environment. We asked them who they learned with and from and how. A further question specifically focused on whom they regarded as their peers and how they understood their peers as a source and a site for learning. {[}1{]} In this section, we will interview and/or survey members of the Peeragogy community with questions similar to those used by Boud and Lee {[}1{]} and then identify strengths and shortcomings as we did with the AAR above. These questions are derived from the AAR. \textbf{Questions} (live page: \url{https://peeragogy.etherpad.mozilla.org/7}; revisions to the original set of questions are marked in italics): \begin{enumerate} \item Who have you learned with \emph{or} from in the Peeragogy project? \emph{What are you doing to contribute to your peers' learning?} \item How have you been learning during the project? \item Who are your peers in this community, and why? \item What were your expectations of participation in this project? \emph{And, specifically, what did you (or do you) hope to learn through participation in this project?} \item What actually happened during your participation in this project (so far)? \emph{Have you been making progress on your learning goals (if any; see prev. question) --- or learned anything unexpected, but interesting?} \item What is right or wrong with what happened (Alternatively: how would you assess the project to date?) \item How might the task be done differently next time? (What's ``missing'' here that would create a ``next time''\emph{, ``sequel'', or ``continuation''?}) \item \emph{How would you like to use the Peeragogy handbook?} \item \emph{Finally, how might we change the questions, above, if we wanted to apply them in your peeragogical context?} \end{enumerate} \subsubsection{\textbf{Reflections on participants' answers}} The questions were intended to help participants reflect on, and change, their practice (i.e. their style of participation). There is a tension, however, between changing midstream and learning what we might do differently next time. There is a related tension between initial structure and figuring things out as we go. Arguably, if we knew, 100\%, how to do peeragogy, then we would not learn very much in writing this handbook. Difficulties and tensions would be resolved ``in advance'' (see earlier comments about ``magical'' technologies for peer production). And yet, despite our considerable collected expertise on collaboration, learning, and teaching, there have been a variety of tensions here! Perhaps we should judge our ``success'' partly on how well we deal with those. Some of the tensions highlighted in the answers are as follows: \begin{enumerate} \item \emph{Slow formation of ``peer'' relationships.} There is a certain irony here: we are studying ``peeragogy'' and yet many respondents did not feel they were really getting to know one another ``as peers'', at least not yet. Those who did have a ``team'' or who knew one another from previous experiences, felt more peer-like in those relationships. Several remarked that they learned less from other individual participants and more from ``the collective'' or ``from everyone''. At the same time, some respondents had ambiguous feelings about naming individuals in the first question: ``I felt like I was going to leave people out and that that means they would get a bad grade - ha!'' One criterion for being a peer was to have built something together, so by this criterion, it stands to reason that we would only slowly become peers through this project. \item \emph{``Co-learning'', ``co-teaching'', ``co-producing''?} One respondent wrote: ``I am learning about peeragogy, but I think I'm failing {[}to be{]} a good peeragog. I remember that Howard {[}once{]} told us that the most important thing is that you should be responsible not only for your own learning but for your peers' learning. {[}\ldots{}{]} So the question is, are we learning from others by ourselves or are we {[}\ldots{}{]} helping others to learn?'' Another wrote: ``To my surprise I realized I could contribute organizationally with reviews, etc. And that I could provide some content around PLNs and group process. Trying to be a catalyst to a sense of forward movement and esprit de corps.'' \item \emph{Weak structure at the outset, versus a more ``flexible'' approach.} One respondent wrote: ``I definitely think I do better when presented with a framework or scaffold to use for participation or content development. {[}\ldots{}{]} (But perhaps it is just that I'm used to the old way of doing things).'' Yet, the same person wrote: ``I am interested in {[}the{]} applicability {[}of p\ae ragogy{]} to new models for entrepreneurship enabling less structured aggregation of participants in new undertakings, freed of the requirement or need for an entrepreneurial visionary/source/point person/proprietor.'' There is a sense that some confusion, particularly at the beginning, may be typical for peeragogy. With hindsight, one proposed ``solution'' would be to ``have had a small group of people as a cadre that had met and brainstormed before the first live session {[}\ldots{}{]} tasked {[}with{]} roles {[}and{]} on the same page''. \item \emph{Technological concerns.} There were quite a variety, perhaps mainly to do with the question: how might a (different) platform handle the tension between ``conversations'' and ``content production''? For example, will Wordpress help us ``bring in'' new contributors, or would it be better to use an open wiki? Another respondent noted the utility for many readers of a take-away PDF version. The site (peeragogy.org) should be ``{[}a{]} place for people to share, comment, mentor and co-learn together in an ongoing fashion.'' \item \emph{Sample size.} Note that answers are still trickling in. How should we interpret the response rate? Perhaps what matters is that we are getting ``enough'' responses to make an analysis. One respondent proposed asking questions in a more ongoing fashion, e.g., asking people who are leaving: ``What made you want to quit the project?'' \end{enumerate} With regard to Points 1 and 2, we might use some ``icebreaking'' techniques or a ``buddy system'' to pair people up to work on specific projects. The project's ``teams'' may have been intended to do this, but commitment or buy-in at the team level was not always high (and in many cases, a ``team'' ended up being comprised of just one person). It does seem that as the progress has progressed, we have begun to build tools that could address Point 3: for example, the Concept Map could be developed into a process diagram that would used to ``triage'' a project at its outset, help project participants decide about their roles and goals. Point 4 seems to devolve to the traditional tension between the ``good enough'' and the ``best'': we have used an existing platform to move forward in an ``adequate'' way. And yet, some technological improvements may be needed for future projects in p\ae ragogy. (Furthermore, note that our choice to use a CC0 license means that if other people find the content useful, they are welcome to deploy it on their own platform, if they prefer.) Finally, Point 5 is still up in the air (more answers more be coming in shortly - I think I have sent around enough reminders). Hopefully the questionnaire will be useful to the group even with a not--100\% response rate! Points 4 and 5 are related, in that an ongoing questionnaire for people leaving (or joining) the project could be implemented as a fairly simple technology, which would provide feedback for site maintainers. Gathering a little information as a condition of subscribing or unsubscribing seems like a safe, light-weight, way to learn about the users (tho there is always the possibility that rather than unsubscribing, non-participating users will just filter messages from the site). An underlying tension (or synergy?) --- between learning and producing --- was highlighted in our earlier work on paragogy. If we learn by producing, that is good. However, I have argued in {[}4{]} that paragogical praxis is based less on producing and more on reusing. If downstream users of this handbook find it to, indeed, be useful, we may have done enough. \emph{For all we know, we are the ``cadre'' (see above) charged with determining how best to do things in ``subsequent rounds''! }And, with this, we turn to a third case study, where our work so far is reapplied in an offline educational context. \subsection{Discussion} We reconsider the appropriateness of the AAR and the paragogy principles in contexts beyond P2PU, using {[}5{]} as a guide to our (meta-)critique and analysis. \begin{quote} \emph{In recent years, the tools, knowledge base and discourse of the learning technology profession has been bolstered by the appearance of conceptual paradigms such as the `five stage e-moderating model' (Salmon, 2000) and the new mantra of `communities of practice' (Wenger, 1998). This paper will argue that, although these frameworks are useful in informing and guiding learning technology practice, there are inherent dangers in them becoming too dominant a discourse. The main focus will be on the `five stage e-moderating model' as providing an exemplar of a discourse which is in danger of forming a `grand narrative' (Lyotard, 1984) or totalizing explanation of how to design and deliver online training programmes.} {[}5{]} \end{quote} In a sense, the more reified a pattern, the less we learn by deploying it (\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/anti-patterns-concerns-complaints-and-critiques\#comment-2355}{see these comments}). If we were trying to validate the paragogy model simply by fitting feedback to it (Case Study 2), that would be an act of intellectual dishonesty. Nevertheless, the act of fitting data to this model, as a constructive and creative act, is in fact useful --- and a sign that we are still learning about what makes paragogy work. Not only on a theoretical level (summed up below), but also on a technological level (see \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/researching-p\%C3\%A6ragogy}{this page}). \textbf{Reflections on practice and experience suggest the following Paragogical Principles\ldots{}} \textbf{\emph{Changing context as a decentered center.}} We interact by changing the space. \textbf{Develop empirical studies and a critical apparatus.}\textbf{ }It seems we begin with weak ties, and then experience a slow formation of ``peer'' relationships, as we form and re-form our social context, and come to better understand our goals. \textbf{\emph{Meta-learning as a font of knowledge.}} We interact by changing what we know about ourselves. \textbf{Find companions for the journey}. We learn a lot about ourselves by interacting with others. But participants struggle to find the right way to engage: ``\emph{co-learning}'', ``\emph{co-teaching}'', or ``\emph{co-producing}''? Moreover, ``People come---they stay for a while, they flourish, they build---and they go.'' \textbf{\emph{Peers provide feedback that wouldn't be there otherwise.}} We interact by changing our perspective on things. \textbf{Work with real users}. We begin with a weak structure at the outset but this may afford a more ``flexible'' approach as time goes on (see also this \href{http://peeragogy.org/adding-structure-with-activities/}{handbook section} which offers advice on designing activities that help create a ``flexible structure''). \textbf{\emph{Learning is distributed and nonlinear.}} We interact by changing the way things connect. \textbf{Study and build nonlinear interfaces}. There are a number of technological concerns, which in a large part have to do with tensions between ``content production'' and ``conversation'', and to a lesser extent critique the platforms we're using. \textbf{\emph{Realize the dream if you can, then wake up!}} We interact by changing our objectives. \textbf{\textbf{Limit philosophizing}} Even with a small group, we can extract meaningful ideas about peer learning and form a strong collective effort, which moves things forward for those involved: this means work. We would not get the same results through ``pure contemplation''. This collection of ideas seems to suggests that paragogy is less of a grand narrative and more of a patchwork collection of tricks or heuristics for group work. Rather than narrativizing peer learning, paragogy itself provides a non-linear interface that we can plug into and adapt where appropriate (like we adapted our questionnaire's questions in Case Study 2). Instead of one grand narrative, we see a growing collection of ``\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/patterns-and-use-cases}{use cases}''. The more we share our practice and experience having to do with co-organizing learning or building platforms for the same, the more robust and useful paragogy will become. It may never become a ``rigorous discipline''! But if not, that is OK. \paragraph{References} {[}1{]}: Boud, D. and Lee, A. (2005). `Peer learning' as pedagogic discourse for research education. \emph{Studies in Higher Education}, 30(5):501---516. Available online at \url{http://manainkblog.typepad.com/faultlines/files/BoudLee2005.pdf} {[}2{]}: Joseph Corneli and Charles Jeffrey Danoff, Paragogy, in Sebastian Hellmann, Philipp Frischmuth, Sören ä Auer, and Daniel Dietrich (eds.), \emph{Proceedings of the 6th Open Knowledge Conference, Berlin, Germany, June 30 \& July 1, 2011}, \href{http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-739/paper\_5.pdf}{http://ceur-ws.org/Vol--739/paper\_5.pdf} {[}3{]}: Joseph Corneli and Alexander Mikroyannidis (2011). Personalised and Peer-Supported Learning: The Peer-to-Peer Learning Environment (P2PLE), \emph{Digital Education Review}, 20. \url{http://greav.ub.edu/der/index.php/der/article/view/188/330} {[}4{]}: Joseph Corneli, \href{http://paragogy.net/ParagogicalPraxisPaper}{Paragogical Praxis}, to appear in \emph{E-Learning and Digital Media} (ISSN 2042--7530), Volume 9, Number 3, 2012 {[}5{]}: Lisewski, B., and P. Joyce (2003). Examining the Five Stage e-Moderating Model: Designed and Emergent Practice in the Learning Technology Profession, \emph{Association for Learning Technology Journal}, 11, 55--66. \chapter[\textbf{Adding structure}]{Adding structure with activities} In the introduction to ``\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/organizing-a-learning-context}{Organizing a Learning Context}'', we remarked that a ``learning space'' is \emph{only potentially} less structured than a ``course''. For example, a library tends to be highly structured, with quiet rooms for reading, protocols for checking out books, a cataloging and shelving system that allows people to find what they are looking for, as well as rules that deter vandalism and theft. (Digital libraries don't need to play by all the same rules, but are still structured.) But more structure does not always lead to better learning. In a 2010 Forbes article titled, ``The Classroom in 2020,'' George Kembel describes a future in which ``Tidy lectures will be supplanted by messy real-world challenges.'' The Stanford School of Design, (or ``d.school'' --- which Kemble co-founded and currently directs) is already well-known for its open collaborative spaces, abundant supply of post-it notes and markers, and improvisational brainstorm activities --- almost the opposite of traditional lecture-based learning. One ``unexpected benefit'' of dealing with real-world challenges is that we can change our approach as we go. This is how it works in peer learning: peers can decide on different structures not just once (say, at the beginning of a course), but throughout the duration of their time together. This way, they are never ``stuck'' with existing structures, whether they be messy or clean. At least\ldots{} that's the ideal. In practice, ``bottlenecks'' frequently arise. For example, in a digital library context, there may be bottlenecks having to do with software development, organizational resources, community good will, or access to funding --- and probably all of the above. In a didactic context, it may be as simple as one person knowing something that others do not. While we can't eliminate scarcity in one stroke, we can design activities for peer learning that are ``scarcity aware'' and that help us move in the direction of adaptive learning structures. \subsection{Planning Peer Learning Activities} We begin with two simple questions: \begin{itemize} \item How do we select an appropriate learning activity? \item How do we go about creating a learning activity if we don't find an existing one? \end{itemize} ``Planning a learning activity'' should mean planning an \emph{effective} learning activity, and in particular that means something that people can and will engage with. In short, an appropriate learning activity may be one that you already do! At the very least, current activities can provide a ``seed'' for even more effective ones. \begin{quote} \emph{Here's a little trick to help you keep focused on things you're trying to do. Get a bunch of index cards and do this every day:}\emph{1. Sit down and write down all the things you think you need to do right then. {[}\ldots{}{]} Write them as short little notes like a ``to do list''.2. Then, take the first thing that you can do right now and do it. Get it done then cross it off the card.3. Keep doing this, and if you think of something else you need to do, put it on a card. Just keep filling them up.4. At the end of the day, go back through your card and find any unfinished things and remove any that you'll honestly never do.5. The next day, take all the things you didn't do from the day before and copy them onto a new card, then start with \#1 again.} --- Zed Shaw, \url{http://learnpythonthehardway.org/book/intro.html\#comment-409972596} \end{quote} But when entering unfamiliar territory, it can be difficult to know where to begin. And remember the bottlenecks mentioned above? When you run into difficulty, ask yourself: \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns-and-heuristics/}{why is this hard?} You might try adapting Zed Shaw's exercise, and make a list of limiting factors, obstacles, etc., then cross off those which you can find a strategy to deal with (add an annotation as to why). For example, you might decide to overcome your lack of knowledge in some area by hiring a tutor or expert consultant, or by putting in the hours learning things the hard way (Zed would particularly approve of the latter choice). If you can't find a strategy to deal with some issue, presumably you can table it, at least for a while. Strategic thinking like this works well for one person. What about when you're planning activities for someone else? Here you have to be careful: remember, this is peer learning, not traditional ``teaching'' or ``curriculum design''. The first rule of thumb for \emph{peer learning} is: don't plan activities for others unless you plan to to take part as a fully engaged participant. Otherwise, it might be a peer learning activity, but it's not yours. (Perhaps your engagement is just as ``designer'' --- that's OK. But if you don't plan to ``get'' as well as ``give'', you're not really a peer --- which is perfectly OK, but you might find other reading material that will serve you better than this handbook in that case!) In short, it would be useful to walk through the ``what do you need to do'' and ``why is it hard'' exercises from the point of view of all of the participants, keeping in mind that they will, in general, assume different roles. To the extent that you can do so, spell out what these roles are and what activities comprise them. For example, in a mathematics learning context, you would be likely to find people\ldots{} \begin{itemize} \item solving textbook-style problems \item finding and sharing new problems \item asking questions when something seems too difficult \item fixing expository material to respond to critique \item offering critique and review of proposed solutions \item offering constructive feedback to questions (e.g. hints) \item organizing material into structured collections \item working on applications to real-world problems \item doing ``meta'' research activities that analyse ``what works'' for any and all of the above \end{itemize} Each one of those activities may be ``hard'' for one reason or another. In particular, as a system the different activities tend to depend on one another. If you have people working in a ``student role'' but no one who can take on a ``TA role'', things will be more difficult for the students. As a (co-)organizer, part of \emph{your} job is to try to make sure all of the relevant roles are covered by someone (who may in the end wear many hats). You can further decompose each role into specific concrete activities. They might come in the form of instructions to follow: ``\emph{How to write a good critique}'' or ``\emph{How to write a proof}''. They might come in the form of accessible exercises (where ``accessible'' depends on the person): ``\emph{Your first geometry problem}'' or \href{http://www.ic.unicamp.br/\%7Emeidanis/courses/mc336/2006s2/funcional/L-99\_Ninety-Nine\_Lisp\_Problems.html}{\emph{Ninety-Nine LISP problems}}, etc. Depending on the features of the learning context, you may be able to support the written instructions or exercises with live/in-person feedback (e.g. meta-critique to coach and guide novice critics, a demonstration, etc.). \subsection{Our immediate scenario: building activities for the Peeragogy Handbook} Adding a bunch of activities to the handbook won't solve all of our usability issues, but we've agreed that they will help a lot. So at this point, we are revisiting the \href{http://peeragogy.org/table-of-contents/}{table of contents} and thinking about each article or section from this perspective: \begin{enumerate} \item When looking at this piece of text, what type of knowledge are we (and the reader) trying to gain? Technical skills (like learning how to edit Final Cut Pro), or abstract skills (like learning how to make sense of data)? What's the takeaway? I.e., what's the point? \item What's difficult here? What might be difficult for someone else? \item What learning activity recipes might be appropriate? (See below.) \item What customizations do we need for this particular application? \end{enumerate} \textbf{\emph{ }As a quick example: designing a learning activity for the current page} \begin{enumerate} \item We want to be able to come up with effective learning activities to accompany a ``how to'' article for peer learners. These activities will extend the ``how to'' aspect from the written word to the world of action. \item It might be difficult for some of us to ``unplug'' from all the reading and writing that we're now habituated to doing. But peer learning isn't just about the exchange of text: there are lots and lots of ways to learn. \item Like \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/paeragogy-helps-solve-complex-problems/}{Neo} (in one of our use cases), it could be useful to ``become more aware of the peer learning we do every day''. And to think about ``How do you learn best?'' \item So, the proposed handbook activity is to step away from the handbook for a while. In fact, why not take a \href{http://zenhabits.net/edit-your-life-part-6-a-media-fast/}{media fast} for a given period of time and look at peer learning as a basic human activity. (Hey, it just sounds to me like you might need to unplug, man!) \end{enumerate} \subsection{Resources for identifying a dozen or so ``Learning Activity Recipes'':} \begin{itemize} \item The \href{http://www.kstoolkit.org/KS+Methods}{KS ToolKit} \item \href{http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/coursedesign/tutorial/strategies.html}{Designing Effective and Innovative Sources} (See the section on ``Teaching Strategies for Actively Engaging Students in the Classroom'') \item Each of our \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns-and-heuristics/}{patterns and heuristics} suggest various activities, like ``practicing the heuristics'', ``finding examples of the patterns'', etc. \item Our \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases}{Use Cases} provide many hypothetical examples of ``peeragogy in action''. \end{itemize} \subsection{Recommended Reading} \href{http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/BootcampBootleg2010v2SLIM.pdf}{The d.school Bootcamp Bootleg} (CC-By-NC-SA) includes lots of fun activities to try. Can you crack the code and define new ones that are equally cool? \chapter[\textbf{The student authored syllabus}]{ The student authored syllabus } In either formal learning, informal learning or models which transition between the two, there are many opportunities for learners to co-create the syllabus and/or outline their own course of action. The ``sage on the stage'' of formal instruction must become at the most a ``guide on the side'' who acts as a coach appearing only when needed rather than as a lecturer who determines the content that the learners need to master. In the following inspirational but certainly not prescriptive examples, we will focus on co-learning methods drawn from a Social Constructivist perspective, which fits nicely here.We offer a few examples below to show a range of learner centered approaches. They all are based on co-learners hosting each other for one of a number of digestible topics in the larger subject area or domain that the group formed in order to explore. This can take place across a number of media and timelines.The following methods will result in each co-learner gaining deep knowledge in a specific topic and moderate knowledge across several topics. The unique joy of this approach is that no two cohorts will ever be the same. The content will always be fresh, relevant, and changing. A group can even reconvene with slightly or dramatically different topics over and over using the same underlying process.The appropriateness of the learner-created syllabus technique depends on two factors: 1) the involvement of experts in the group and 2) the level of proficiency of the group. In general, novices who may or may not have a deep interest in the subject matter benefit from more structure and experts who point to key concepts and texts. An example of this is the university survey course for first or second year students who, we assume, need more guidance as they enter the subject matter. Graduate seminars are generally much more fluid---open dialogues between motivated experts require little structure or guidance.We also need effective methods for groups which contain novices, experts, and everyone in between. In groups with a wide range of expertise, it is important that each co-learner chooses to focus their deep inquiry on a topic that they are less familiar with. This will `even out' the expertise level across the cohort as well as ensure that a co-learner is neither bored nor dominating the dialogue. \subsection{3 example designs to structure the learning} \subsubsection{Weekly topics structure} One way to structure the course is to have each co-learner host a topic each week. Perhaps multiple students host their topics in the same week. This progression provides a rotation of presentations and activities to support the entire group in engaging with the topics and challenges to the thinking of the presenters in a constructive and respectful manner.Pro: co-learners have discrete timelines and manageable chunks of responsibilityCon: the format may become disjointed, and the depth of inquiry will likely be somewhat shallow \subsubsection{Milestone based structure} In this structure, each co-learner host their topics in parallel with similar activities and milestones that the whole group moves through together. Milestones can be set for a certain date, or the group can `unlock' their next milestone whenever all participants have completed the previous milestone. This second milestone timeline can be great for informal groups where participation levels may vary from week to week due to external factors, and the sense of responsibility and game-like levels can be motivating for many co-learners.Each co-learner may start with a post of less than 500 words introducing the topic on a superficial level. When everyone has done this, the group might move on to posting questions to the post authors. Then, there may be a summary post of the activity so far with critical recommendations or insights.Pro:co- learners have more time to digest a topic, formulate a complex schema, and generate deeper questionsCon: it will be a few weeks before the topic level schema can form into a broader understanding of the subject matter or domain (seeing the big picture takes longer). \subsubsection{Relay learning structure} This is similar to the milestone structure. However, co-learners rotate topics. If one learner posts an introductory write-up on a topic the first cycle, they may be researching questions on another topic in the next cycle, posting a summary in a third, and then posting a summary on their original topic in the fourth. \textbf{Pro}: co-learners can experience responsibility for several topics. \textbf{Con}: co-learners may receive a topic that is poorly researched or otherwise neglected \subsection{Content} \subsubsection{A vast number of topics} Within a subject of mutual interest to a group, there are a considerable number of topics or questions. What is important is that each co-learner can take responsibility for a reasonably narrow area given the duration of the course or the timeline of the group. Areas that are too broad will result in a very superficial understanding, and areas that are too narrow will result in a dull experience. For example, in marine biology, topics such as ``the inter-tidal zone'' may be too broad for a course cycle of a few weeks. Narrowing to one species may be too specific for a course over a few months. \subsubsection{Learner generated topics} Most cohorts will have some knowledge of the shared area of interest or an adjacent area. It is a good idea to respect the knowledge and experience that each member of the group brings to the table. A facilitator or coordinator may generate a list of potential topic areas, setting an example of the scale of a topic. We suggest that the participants in the group are also polled for additions to the list. In large courses, sending out a Google Form via email can be an effective way to get a quick list with a high response rate. \subsubsection{Expert informed topics} If there is no expert facilitator in the group, we suggest that the cohort begin their journey with a few interviews of experts to uncover what the main buzz words and areas of focus might be. One way to locate this type of expert help is through contacting authors in the subject matter on social networks, reviewing their posts for relevance, and reaching out with the request. We recommend two people interview the expert over video chat, for example in a Hangout. One person conducts the interview, and one person takes notes and watches the time. We strongly suggest that the interview be outlined ahead of time: \paragraph{Warm up} Who are you, what are your goals, and why do you think this interview will help? \paragraph{Foundational questions} Ask a few questions that might elicit shortt answers to build rapport and get your interviewee talking. \paragraph{Inquiry} What people say and what they do can often be very different. Ask about topics required for mastery of the subject matter (``What are the areas someone would need to know about to be considered proficient in this subject?''). Also, ask \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical\_Incident\_Technique}{questions that require storytelling}. Avoid \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superlative}{superlative} or \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed-ended\_question}{close-ended questions}. \paragraph{Wrap up} Thank the interviewee for their time, and be sure to follow up by letting them know both what you learned and what you accomplished because they helped you. \subsection{Shared goals and group norms} \subsubsection{Choosing useful outputs} Getting together for the sake of sharing what you know in an informal way can be fairly straightforward and somewhat useful. Most groups find that a common purpose and output that are explicitly defined and documented help to engage, motivate, and drive the group. For the examples above, the group may decide to create a blog with posts on the various topics or create a wiki where they can share their insights. Other outputs can include community service projects, business proposals, recommendations to senior management or administration, new products, and more. The key is to go beyond sharing for sharing sake and move toward an output that will be of use beyond the co-learning group. This activity is best described in \href{http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm}{Connectivist}theory as the special case of networked learning where we find evidence of learning in collective action and/or behavioral change in groups rather than apsychological or neurological process in individuals. \subsubsection{Group cohesion (a.k.a. the rules of the road)} One challenge of this kind of collaboration is that each group will need to decide on norms, acceptable practices and behaviors. Culturally diverse groups in particular may run into communication or other issues unless there is a way to create shared expectations and communicate preferences.One way to do this is with a team charter. This is a living document where the initial rules of engagement can live for reference. The group may add or edit this document over time based on experience, and that is a welcome thing! This documentation is a huge asset for new members joining the group who want to contribute quickly and effectively. Any co-editing word processing program will work, but we strongly recommend something that can be edited simultaneously and that lives in the cloud. (\href{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0hHaQgdypI}{Google Docs} is convenient because you can also embed your Charter into another site.)Try starting with the following three sections, and allow some time for the group to co-edit and negotiate the document between icebreakers and kicking off the official learning process. \textbf{Mission} - Why are you forming the group? What do you want to accomplish together? \textbf{Norms} - Use \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netiquette}{netiquette}? No \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming\_\%28Internet\%29}{flaming}? Post your vacation days to a \href{http://support.google.com/calendar/bin/answer.py?hl=en\&answer=36598}{shared calendar}? Cultural norms? \textbf{Members} - It is useful to include a photo and a link to a public profile such as Twitter, Google+ or Facebook. \subsection{Assessments and feedback loops} \subsubsection{Co-authored assessment rubrics} \emph{Tests. Quizzes. Exams. How can the co-learning group assess their performance?} \medskip These types of courses benefit from an approach similar to coaching. Set goals as individuals and a group in the beginning, define what success looks like, outline steps that are needed to achieve the goal, check in on the goal progress periodically, and assess the results at the end of the course against the goal criteria. Goals may include domain expertise, a business outcome, a paper demonstrating mastery, a co-created resource, or even the quality of collaboration and adherence to shared group norms. \paragraph{Learner created assessments} Another effective way to create an assessment is to decide on an individual or group output and create a peer assessment rubric based on the goals of the individual or group.One way to create a rubric is to spend some time defining the qualities you want your output to have based on positive examples. Perhaps a group wants to create a blog. Each person on the team may identify the qualities of a great blog post based on examples that they admire. They can use that example to create a criteria for assessment of co-learner authored blog posts. We recommend that the criteria have a 0 - 5 point scale with 0 being non-existent and 5 being superb. Writing a few indicators in the 1, 3, and 5 columns helps to calibrate reviewers.Create a shared document, perhaps starting with a list of criteria. Collapse similar criteria into one item, and create the indicators or definitions of 1, 3, and 5 point performance. Agree on the rubric, and decide on how the co-learners will be assigned assessment duties. WIll everyone review at least two others? Will each co-learner product need at least 3 reviewers before it goes live?In a university setting, the instructor of record may wish to approve a peer assessment rubric, and it is sometimes a good idea to have a few outside experts give feedback on criteria that the group may have missed. \paragraph{Outside assessments}It is possible that an instructor of record or similar authority will create the assessment for performance. In these cases, it is crucial that theco-learners have access to the grading rubric ahead of time so that they can ensure their activities and timeline will meet any requirements. In this case, it may be possible to require that the co-learners self-organize entirely, or there may be intermediary assignments such as the charter, project plan or literary review. \subsection{Cyclical use of these models} \subsubsection{So much more to learn} As mentioned above, the joy of this type of learning is that no two groups will ever do it the same. Their process, goals, and outcomes can all be unique. As designers and facilitators of this type of learning environment, we can say it is a wild ride! Each class is exciting, refreshing, and on trend. The co-learners become our teachers.If a group generates more topics than it is possible to cover at one time given the number of group members or if a group has plans to continue indefinitely, it is always possible to set up a system where potential topics are collected at all times. These unexplored topics can be harvested for use in another learning cycle, continuing until the group achieves comprehensive mastery. \subsection{Risks} This format is not without its own unique pitfalls: some challenges are learner disorientation or frustration in a new learning structure with ambiguous expectations and uneven participation.\textbf{} Some groups simply never gel, and we don't know why they have failed to achieve the cohesion required to move forward. Other groups are the exact opposite. Here are a few risks to consider if you would like to try the methods suggested here and how to mitigate them. \textbf{Uneven expertise} - Ask co-learners to be responsible for topics that are new to them \textbf{Uneven participation and cohesion} - Ask co-learners what they want to do to motivate the group rather than imposing your own ideas \textbf{Experts/facilitators that kill the conversation} - In the charter or other documentation, explicitly state that the purpose of the discussion is to further the conversation, and encourage experts to allow others to explore their own thinking by asking probing (not leading) questions. \textbf{Ambiguous goals} - Encourage the group to document their mission and what they will do as a team. This can change over time, but it is best to start out with a clear purpose. \subsection{Conclusion} Make mistakes. Correct course. Invite new perspectives. Create a structure that everyone can work with. Change it when it breaks. Most of all, have fun! \chapter[\textbf{How to Organize a MOOC}]{ Connectivism in Practice --- How to Organize a MOOC} \subsection{Summary:} Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are online learning events that can take place synchronously and asynchronously for months. Participants assemble to hear, see, and participate in backchannel communication during live lectures. They read the same texts at the same time, according to a calendar. Learning takes place through self-organized networks of participants, and is almost completely decentralized: individuals and groups create blogs or wikis around their own interpretations of the texts and lectures, and comment on each other's work; each individual and group publicises their RSS feed, which are automatically aggregated by a special (freely available) tool, gRSShopper. Every day, an email goes out to all participants, aggregating activity streams from all the blogs and wikis that engage that week's material. MOOCs are a practical application of a learning theory known as ``connectivism'' that situates learning in the networks of connections made between individuals and between texts. \subsection{Introduction} \textbf{Traditionally, scholars distinguish between three main }\href{http://ryan2point0.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/taxonomy-of-learning-theories/}{\textbf{categories of learning theories}}\textbf{: behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism. Some would add a fourth one: }\href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectivism}{\textbf{connectivism}}\textbf{, but this is }\href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Connectivism}{\textbf{disputed}}\textbf{. One interesting application of connectivism, a learning theory and practice for the digital era, is the Massive Open Online Course. } \subsection{A learning theory for the digital age} The connectivist theory describes learning as a process of creating connections and developing networks. It is based on the premise that knowledge exists out in the world, rather than inside an individual's mind. Connectivism sees the network as a central metaphor for learning, with a node in the network being a concept (data, feelings, images, etc.) that can be meaningfully related to other nodes. Not all connections are of equal strength in this metaphor; in fact, many connections may be quite weak.On a \textbf{practical level}, this approach recommends that learning should focus on where to find information (streams), and how to evaluate and mash up those streams, rather than trying to enter lots of (perishable) information into one's skull. Knowing the pipes is more important than knowing what exactly each pipe contains at a given moment. \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen\_Downes}{Stephen Downes} and \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George\_Siemens}{George Siemens} promote the idea of connectivism. They also practice it, by organizing Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): for instance, \href{http://change.mooc.ca/}{Change11}, organized with . People are free to participate. Each week a subject is discussed during synchronous sessions, which are recorded and uploaded for reference on the Change11 website. The site also includes an archive of daily newsletters and RSS-feeds of blog posts and tweets from participants.MOOCs tend to be very learner-centered: people are encouraged to pursue their own interests and link up with others who might help them. But the distributed and free nature of the projects also leads to complaints: people often find it confusing to follow up on all the discussions (the facilitators say one should not try to follow up on all the content).Stephen Downes explains in \href{http://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2007/02/what-connectivism-is.html}{What Connectivism Is}: ``This implies a pedagogy that (a) seeks to describe `successful' networks (as identified by their properties, which I have characterized as diversity, autonomy, openness, and connectivity) and (b) seeks to describe the practices that lead to such networks, both in the individual and in society (which I have characterized as modeling and demonstration (on the part of a teacher) and practice and reflection (on the part of a learner)).''George Siemens says connectivism is a \href{http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan\_05/article01.htm}{learning theory for the digital age}. \subsection{Connectivism in practice} One example of a MOOC that claims to embody the connectivist theory is \href{http://change.mooc.ca/index.html}{change.mooc.ca}. The ``\href{http://change.mooc.ca/how.htm}{how it works}'' section of the site explains what connectivism means in practice.\emph{The MOOC organizers developed a number of ways to combine the distributed nature of the discussions with the need for a constantly updated overview and for a federated structure. So, if your team wants to organize an open online course, these are five points to take into consideration: }1) There is no body of content the participants have to memorize, but the learning results from activities they undertake. The activities are different for each person. \emph{A course schedule with suggested reading, assignments for synchronous or asynchronous sessions} is provided (using Google Docs spreadsheets internally, Google Calendar externally - one could also use a wiki), but participants are free to pick and choose. Normally there is a topic, activities, reading resources and often a guest speaker for each week. One should even reflect upon the question whether a start- and end date are actually needed. It is crucial \emph{to explain the particular philosophy of this kind of MOOC}, and this right from the outset, because chances are learners will come with expectations informed by their more traditional learning experiences.1) First, it is important to discuss the ``internal'' aspects, such as self-motivation: what do the participants want to achieve, what is their \emph{bigger goal}? And what are \emph{their intentions} when they select certain activities (rather than other possibilities)? Everyone has her own intended outcome. Suggest that participants meditate on all this and jot down their objectives. And how can they avoid becoming stressed out and getting depressed because they feel ``they cannot keep up with all this''? The facilitators should have a good look at these motivations, even if it's impossible to assist every participant individually (for large-scale MOOCs).2) Ideally participants should get help in organizing themselves for this course by \emph{ acquiring the necessary digital skills}. Which skills are ``necessary'' should be decided by the group itself. It's all about selecting, choosing, remixing - also called ``curating''. There are lots of tools which you can use for this: blogs, social bookmarks, wikis, mindmaps, forums, social dashboards, networks such as Twitter with their possibilities such as hashtags and lists\ldots{} Maybe these tools are self-evident for some, but not necessarily for all the participants.3) The course is not located in one place but \emph{ is distributed across the web}: on various blogs and blogging platforms, on various groups and online networks, on photo- and video-sharing platforms, on mindmaps and other visualization platforms, on various tools for synchronous sessions. This wide variety is in itself an important learning element.There are weekly \emph{synchronous sessions} (using Blackboard collaborate, or similar group chatting tool). During these sessions, experts and participants give presentations and enter into discussions. Groups of participants also have synchronous meetings at other venues (such as Second Life). Try to plan this well in advance!4) Many participants highly appreciate efforts to give \textbf{an overview} of the proceedings. \emph{Specifically, the} \href{http://change.mooc.ca/newsletter.htm}{\textbf{Daily Newsletter}} \emph{ is a kind of hub, a community newspaper}. In that Daily there is alo a list of the blog posts mentioning the course-specific tag (e.g. ``change11''), also the tweets with hashtag \#change11 are listed in the Daily. Of course, the MOOC has \href{http://change.mooc.ca/index.html}{a site} where sessions, newsletters and other resources are archived and discussion threads can be read.From the very beginning of the course it's necessary to explain the \emph{importance of tagging} the various contributions, to suggest a \emph{hashtag}.For harvesting all this distributed content, Stephen Downes advocates the use of \textbf{\href{http://grsshopper.downes.ca/index.html}{gRSShopper}}, which is a personal web environment that combines resource aggregation, a personal dataspace, and personal publishing (Downes developed it and would like to build a hosted version - eventually financed via Kickstarter). The gRSShopper can be found on a \emph{registration page}, which is useful primarily for sending the newsletter. It allows you to organize your online content any way you want, to import content - your own or others' - from remote sites, to remix and repurpose it, and to distribute it as RSS, web pages, JSON data, or RSS feeds. \href{http://grsshopper.downes.ca/about.htm}{Downes}: ``For example, the gRSShopper harvester will harvest a link from a given feed. A person, if he or she has admin privileges, can transform this link into a post, adding his or her own comments. The post will contain information about the original link's author and journal. Content in gRSShopper is created and manipulated through the use of system code that allows administrators to harvest, map, and display data, as well as to link to and create their own content. gRSShopper is also intended to act as a fully-fledged publishing tool.'' (for alternatives, see the technologies section further on).Alternatives for registrations: Google Groups for instance. But specific rules about privacy should be dealt with: what will be the status of the contributions? In this MOOC the status is public and open by default, for Downes this is an important element of the course.5) \emph{Technologies} used: some MOOCs use Moodle, but Downes dislikes the centralization aspect and it's not as open as it could be, ``people feel better writing in their own space.'' Other possibilities: Google groups, Wordpress, Diigo, Twitter, Facebook page, Second Life\ldots{} but each course uses different \emph{mixtures of the many tools out there}. People choose their environment - whether it is WoW or Minecraft. Students use Blogger, WordPress, Tumblr, Posterous as blogging tools. \paragraph{A key element is RSS Harvesting.} Give participants a structure to add their blogfeed. Look at this example, how participants get this structure and additional explanations (videos) in order to contribute their blog feed: \url{http://change.mooc.ca/new\_feed.htm}. The administrator in this case uses gRSShopper to process the content and put it in a database, process it and send it to other people. Alternatively one can use Google Reader (the list of feeds is available as an OPML file - which can be imported in for instance Google Reader). There is also a plug-in for Wordpress (one can use a Google Doc spreadsheet for the feeds, then use Wordpress for the aggregation). Many other content management systems have RSS harvesting features.Each individual could run her own aggregator, but Downes offers it as a service. \emph{But aggregators are needed, whether individual, centralized or both}. \paragraph{Specialized harvesting} uses Twitter, Diigo, Delicious, Google Groups, Ifttt.com (if this then that) and feed43.com (take ordinary web page and turn it into an RSS feed). \paragraph{Synchronous environments}: Blackboard Collaborate (what they use now for Change11), Adobe Connect, Big Blue Button, WizIQ, Fuze, WebX, Webcasting - web radio. Have videoconferencing using Skype or Google Hangout and putting that through Livestream or ustream.tv for instance. Or take the audiostream and try to broadcast is as webradio. \emph{Set up and test ahead of time, but experiment. } \paragraph{Newsletter or Feeds:} very important (see earlier remarks about the Daily newsletter). You can use Twitter or a Facebook page, Downes uses email, also creates an RSS version through gRSShopper and sends it through Ifttt.com back to Facebook and Twitter. For the rest of us there is Wordpress: \url{http://www.wpbeginner.com/wp-tutorials/create-a-free-email-newsletter-service-using-wordpress/} and there is this handy guide suggested by Downes: \url{http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/01/19/design-and-build-an-email-newsletter-without-losing-your-mind/}.Consider using a content management system and databases to put out specialized pages and the newsletter in an elegant way, but it requires a learning curve. Otherwise, use blogs / wikis.6) Participants are strongly encouraged\textbf{ to comment }on each others' blogs and to launch discussion threads. By doing so they practice a fundamental social media skill - developing networks by commenting on various places and engaging in conversations. It is important to have activities and get people to be involved rather than sit back.For an in-depth presentation, please have a look at \href{http://www.downes.ca/presentation/290}{Facilitating a Massive Open Online Course} by Stephen Downes (focusing on research and survey matters, preparing events etc.) \subsection{Resources:} \subsubsection{Some basics} - \href{http://change.mooc.ca/how.htm}{How this Course Works}- \href{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW3gMGqcZQc}{What is a MOOC}- \href{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8avYQ5ZqM0}{Success in a MOOC}- \href{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWKdhzSAAG0}{Knowledge in a MOOC}- \href{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqnyhLfNH3I}{Introduction and invitation} \subsubsection{Further reading} MOOC-site \url{http://change.mooc.ca/} What Connectivism Is by Stephen Downes \url{http://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2007/02/what-connectivism-is.html}An Introduction to Connective Knowledge by Stephen Downes \url{http://www.downes.ca/post/33034}\href{http://www.downes.ca/presentation/290}{Facilitating a Massive Open Online Course}, by Stephen Downes gRSShopper:\url{http://grsshopper.downes.ca/index.html} Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age by George Siemens \url{http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm} A Connectivism Glossary \url{http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Connectivism\_glossary} Rhizomes and Networks by George Siemens \url{http://www.connectivism.ca/?p=329} Rhizomatic Education: Community as Curriculum by Dave Cormier \url{http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol4\_issue5/Rhizomatic\_Education-\_\_Community\_as\_Curriculum.pdf} Knowing Knowledge, a book by George Siemens \url{http://www.amazon.ca/Knowing-Knowledge-George-Siemens/dp/1430302305} \href{http://www.amazon.com/Net-Smart-ebook/dp/B007D5UP9G}{Net Smart} by Howard Rheingold (about internal and external literacies for coping with the `always on' digital era) \href{http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/886/}{Massive Open Online Courses}: Setting Up (StartToMOOC, Part 1) \subsection{Even More Resources:} \href{https://docs.google.com/document/d/14GtDeiMkA61B7vPDSPGLfIzGumOyDhGIlLNcQCv0gec/edit}{Literature review of material related to self-organized peer learning (``peeragogy'')} \subsection{Relevant Handbook pages:} \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/personal-learning-networks}{Personal Learning Networks} \chapter[\textbf{Participation}]{ Participation } All collaborative work is managed in some way. Methods of managing projects, including learning projects, are ranking from the more formal and structured to the less formal and unstructured. \textbf{Participation in business oriented projects} When we think about project management in an organization, we often relate to well established tools and processes. For example, we will use the \href{http://www.pmi.org/PMBOK-Guide-and-Standards.aspx}{PMBOK} (Project Management Body of Knowledge) as a standard. For the Project Management Institute (PMI) and most persons those standards are the key to project success. In classical project management, tasks and deadlines are clearly defined. We will for example use Program Evaluation and Review Technic \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PERT}{PERT} to analyze and represent tasks and represent the project schedule using a \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gantt\_chart}{Gantt chart}. Those are just two of the project management tools to illustrates how project management is well structured resting on its engineering background. In those very structured projects each actor is expected to work exactly as planned and to deliver his part of the work on time, every individual delay potentially leading to a collective delay. \textbf{Participation in educational projects} If we look for analogies between project management and education, we can find some similarities in models pedagogy of. In a paper called \href{http://www-distance.syr.edu/andraggy.html}{Moving from pedagogy to andragogy} by Hiemstra and Sisco, we see how students hold a passive role (on a cognitive level) in the pedagogy model. They are following a plan or syllabus that has been designed by the instructor and that won't change during the session. Students will have to complete all their tasks on time in other words return their exercices to the teacher before the due date. In a peeragogy project, whose roots lie closer to andragogy than in pedagogy, participation to the project is less regulated (see \href{http://peeragogy.org/to-peeragogy/}{from peer learning to peeragogy}). As peeragogy projects members expect to break the \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1\%25\_rule\_\%28Internet\_culture\%29}{90/9/1 rule} {[}1{]} and bring on board more than 1\% of creators and 9\% of editors, they also keep in mind the \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long\_Tail}{Long Tail} rule. ``The term Long Tail has gained popularity in recent times as describing the retailing strategy of selling a large number of unique items with relatively small quantities sold of each'' {[}2{]}. In other words, people working in peeragogy should accept that some participants only contribute few ideas (or may be even just one!). Going further, people may even be allowed to just watch a peeragogy project going on without creating or editing, in order to understand its culture before feeling ready to jump in and contribute more actively. In general a peeragogy community will a lot of adjusting to do as it seeks an equilibrium between order and chaos, allowing everyone to collaborate at their own pace without loosing focus, and in such a manner that the collective can deliver (whether that's a product or a learning experience!). \textbf{Suggestions about how to deal with participation in a peeragogy project} \begin{itemize} \item accept that some people want to watch what is going on before jumping in. This doesn't mean you have to keep them forever. After a while you may un-enroll people who don't add any value to the community. In our Peeragogy project, we've asked people to re-sign up several times (at any given juncture, some proprotion prefer to leave). \item accept that people may only contribute a little: if this contribution is good it will add value to the whole \item understand that you can not impose strict deadlines to volunteers \item let your work be ``open'' in a sense inspired by Wikipedia's \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral\_point\_of\_view}{Neutral Point of View} policy \item give roles to participants and define some ``energy centers'' who will take the lead on specific items in the project \item organize regular face to face or online meetings to talk about progress and what's needed in upcoming days/weeks \item ask participants to be clear about when they will be ready to deliver their contributions \item have clear deadlines, but allow contributions that come in after the deadline --- in general, be flexible \item add a newcomer section on your online platform to help newbies to get started \end{itemize} {[}1{]} \url{http://peeragogy.org/to-peeragogy} {[}2{]} \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long\_Tail} \chapter[\textbf{The Workscape}]{ The Workscape, a learning platform for corporations } Summary: What's required in a corporate learning ecosystem and why. \href{http://vimeo.com/45989904}{Workscapes} from \href{http://vimeo.com/user7021511}{Jay Cross} on \href{http://vimeo.com}{Vimeo}. \subsection{The Workscape, a platform for learning} Formal learning takes place in classrooms; informal learning happens in \emph{workscapes.} A workscape is a learning ecology. As the environment of learning, a workscape includes the workplace. In fact, a workscape has no boundaries. No two workscapes are alike. Your workscape may include being coached on giving effective presentations, calling the help desk for an explanation, and researching an industry on the Net. My workscape could include participating in a community of field technicians, looking things up on a search engine, and living in France for three months.Developing a platform to support informal learning is analogous to landscaping a garden. A major component of informal learning is natural learning, the notion of treating people as organisms in nature. The people are free-range learners. Our role is to protect their environment, provide nutrients for growth, and let nature take its course.A landscape designer's goal is to conceptualize a harmonious, unified, pleasing garden that makes the most of the site at hand. A workscape designer's goal is to create a learning environment that increases the organization's longevity and health and the individual's happiness and well-being.Gardeners don't control plants; managers don't control people. Gardeners and managers have influence but not absolute authority. They can't make\emph{ }a plant fit into the landscape or a person fit into a team.In an ideal Workscape, workers can easily find the people and information they need, learning is fluid and new ideas flow freely, corporate citizens live and work by the organization's values, people know the best way to get things done, workers spend more time creating value than handling exceptions, and everyone finds their work challenging and fulfilling. \subsection{The technical infrastructure of the workscape} When an organization is improving its Workscape, looking at consumer applications is a good way to think about what's required. Ask net-savvy younger workers how they would like to learn new skills, and they bring up the features they enjoy in other services: \begin{itemize} \item Personalize my experience and make recommendations, like Amazon \item Make it easy for me to connect with friends, like Facebook \item Keep me in touch with colleagues and associates in other companies, as on LinkedIn \item Persistent reputations, as at eBay, so you can trust who you're collaborating with \item Multiple access options, like a bank that offers access by ATM, the Web, phone, or human tellers \item Don't overload me. Let me learn from YouTube, an FAQ, or linking to an expert \item Show me what's hot, as Reddit, Digg, MetaFilter, or Fark do \item Give me single sign-on, like using my Facebook profile to access multiple applications \item Let me choose and subscribe to streams of information I'm interested in, like BoingBoing, LifeHacker or Huffpost. \item Provide a single, simple, all-in-one interface, like that provided by Google for search \item Help me learn from a community of kindred spirits, like SlashDot, Reddit, and MetaFilter \item Give me a way to voice my opinions and show my personality, as on my blog \item Show me what others are interested in, as with social bookmarks Diigo and Delicious \item Make it easy to share photos and video, as on Flickr and YouTube \item Leverage ``the wisdom of crowds,'' as when I pose a question to my followers on Twitter or Facebook \item Enable users to rate content, like ``Favoriting'' an item on Facebook or +'ing is on Google or YouTube \end{itemize} Some of those consumer applications are simple to replicate in-house. Others are not. You can't afford to replicate Facebook or Google behind your firewall. That said, there are lots of applications you can implement at reasonable cost. Be skeptical if your collaborative infrastructure that doesn't include these minimal functions: \paragraph{Profiles} - for locating and contacting people with the right skills and background. Profile should contain photo, position, location, email address, expertise (tagged so it's searchable). IBM's Blue Pages profiles include how to reach you (noting whether you're online now), reporting chain (boss, boss's boss, etc.), link to your blog and bookmarks, people in your network, links to documents you frequently share, members of your network. \paragraph{Activity stream} - for monitoring the organization pulse in real time, sharing what you're doing, being referred to useful information, asking for help, accelerating the flow of news and information, and keeping up with change \paragraph{Wikis} - for writing collaboratively, eliminating multiple versions of documents, keeping information out in the open, eliminating unnecessary email, and sharing responsibility for updates and error correction \paragraph{Virtual meetings} - to make it easy to meet online. Minimum feature set: shared screen, shared white board, text chat, video of participants. Bonus features: persistent meeting room (your office online), avatars. \paragraph{Blogs} - for narrating your work, maintaining your digital reputation, recording accomplishments, documenting expert knowledge, showing people what you're up to so they can help out \paragraph{Bookmarks} - to facilitate searching for links to information, discover what sources other people are following, locate experts \paragraph{Mobile access} - Half of America's workforce sometimes works away from the office. Smart phones are surpassing PCs for connecting to networks for access and participation. Phones post most Tweets than computers. Google designs its apps for mobile before porting them to PCs. \paragraph{Social network} - for online conversation, connecting with people, and all of the above functions. \subsection{Conclusion} Learning used to focus on what was in an individual's head. The individual took the test, got the degree, or earned the certificate. The new learning focuses on what it takes to do the job right. The workplace is an open-book exam. What worker doesn't have a cell phone and an Internet connection? Using one's lifelines to get help from colleagues and the Internet to access the world's information is encouraged. Besides, it's probably the team that must perform, not a single individual. Thirty years ago, three-quarters of what a worker need to do the job was stored in her head; now it's less than 10\%. \part{Co-Facilitation and Co-Working} \below{By: Mar\'ia Fernanda and Charlie Danoff} \paragraph{Co-Facilitation}Co-facilitating emerges when people have to work together in order to complete a task, e.g. in schools, universities, shelters, churches, workplaces, etc. \paragraph{What's co-facilitating in peer to peer learning?} Facilitation is the process of enabling groups to work cooperatively and effectively. Peers co-facilitate by taking and sharing leadership roles to move the peer learning process along faster and/or more efficiently. \paragraph{Why do we co-facilitate?}The main purpose is to offer and receive support.Co-facilitation commonly can be found in specific collaborations between two or more people who need each other to complete a task, for example, learn about a given subject, author a technical report, resolve a problem, conduct research and the like. Dr. Fink writes in \emph{Creating Significant Learning Experiences }(Jossey Bass, 2003) that ``in this process, there has to be some kind of change in the learner. No change, no learning''. Significant learning requires that there be some kind of lasting change that is important in terms of the learner's life; therefore a way to measure the effectiveness of co-facilitation is if there's been a change in the peer group. \paragraph{Which roles, competences and skills do we need to co-facilitate?}Co-facilitation roles can be found in groups/teams like basketball, health, Alcoholics Anonymous, spiritual groups, etc. For example, self-help groups are composed of people who gather to share common problems and experiences associated with a particular problem, condition, illness, or personal circumstance.`\,'Freedom to Learn'' is amongst the learning theories Carl Rogers was known for. Commenting on Rogers' related work, Barrett-Lennard (1998: 184) remarked: ``he offered several hypothesized general principles. These included: We cannot teach another person directly; we can only facilitate his learning. The structure and organization of the self appears to become more rigid under threat; to relax its boundaries when completely free from threat \ldots{} The educational situation which most effectively promotes significant learning is one in which 1) threat to the self of the learner is reduced a minimum, and 2) differentiated perception of the field of experience is facilitated.''Part of the facilitator's role is creating a safe place for learning to take place; but they should also challenge the participants. As John Wooden said of coaching ``Be quick, but don't hurry.'' John Heron articulated this nature of facilitation well:`\,'Too much hierarchical control, and participants become passive and dependent or hostile and resistant. They wane in self-direction, which is the core of all learning. Too much cooperative guidance may degenerate into a subtle kind of nurturing oppression, and may deny the group the benefits of totally autonomous learning. Too much autonomy for participants and laissez-faire on your part, and they may wallow in ignorance, misconception, and chaos.'' (Heron, 1999, p. 9) \paragraph{Co-facilitating discussion forums }If peers are preparing a forum discussion, here are some ideas from ``The tool box'', that can be helpful as guidelines for running this type of meetings: \begin{itemize} \item Explain the importance of collaborative group work and make it a requirement. \item Establish how you will communicate in the forum \item Be aware of mutual blind spots in facilitating and observing others \item Watch out for different rhythms of intervention''. \end{itemize} \textbf{Co-facilitating wiki workflows} A good place to begin for any co-facilitators working with a wiki is Wikipedia's famous ``5 Pillars''. \begin{itemize} \item Wikipedia is an encyclopedia \item Wikipedia writes articles from a neutral point-of-view \item Wikipedia is free content that anyone can edit, use, modify, and distribute. \item Editors should interact with each other in a respectful and civil manner. \item Wikipedia does not have firm rules. \end{itemize} \textbf{Co-facilitating live sessions}Learning experiences in Live Sessions which include Social Media and co facilitating exercise is described in the article'' Learning Re-imagined: Participatory, Peer, Global, Online`` by Howard Rheingold, we have taken inspiration from his points and re-mixed them slightly. \begin{itemize} \item Establish roles for co facilitators and participants (moderator, technical recorder, writer to take notes, etc..). \item Provide a reading list --- indicating what is really important and what is more ``nice to know''. \item Ideally before, or when the session begins, take some time to allow participants to familiarize themselves with the tools. \item Introduce yourself and your peers (co-facilitators) and ask the members to make a brief introduction of themselves. \item Review the agenda for the session, both to make sure there \emph{is} an agenda (at the start) and to make sure everything was covered (at the end). \item Online tools like: Mumble, Diigo, Etherpad and chat can be used to communicate and interact in the session. However, consider whether participants are interested in experimenting with lots of tools. Often more tools (and some content) can end up making tasks harder. \item Keep it Simple Stupid, or KISS: Remember you came together with your peers to accomplish something not to discuss an agenda or play with online tools; keep everything as easily accessible as possible to ensure you realize your peer goals. \end{itemize} \textbf{Paragogical Action Review}Following any co-facilitating session it is essential that the co-facilitators come together and review what happened. A useful framework is the Paragogical Action Review (PAR), based on the U.S. Army's After Action Review, which has 4 components, to which we have added a fifth. A further difference in the Paragogical Action Review is that it need not take place ``after'' the action, but can be integrated into the action (accordingly, we use a present tense phrasing). \begin{itemize} \item Review what was supposed to happen (training plans). \item Establish what is happening. \item Determine what's right or wrong with what's happening. \item Determine how the task should be done differently in the future. \item Share your notes with your other peers for feedback and to improve things going forward. \end{itemize} \textbf{Experiences and experiments in co-facilitating peer to peer learning} \begin{itemize} \item ``Learning Reimagined: Participatory, Peer, Global, Online'' by Howard Rheingold \url{http://dmlcentral.net/blog/howard-rheingold/learning-reimagined-participatory-peer-global-online} \item Research Gate is a network dedicated to science and research. To connect, collaborate and discover scientific publications, jobs and conferences. \url{http://www.researchgate.net/} \item Creating and Facilitating Peer Support Groups by The Community Tool Box: \url{http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecontents/section\_1180.aspx} \item Facilitation tips by Villanova University, \url{http://www1.villanova.edu/content/villanova/artsci/vcle/resources/toolkit/\_jcr\_content/pagecontent/download\_8/file.res/FacilitationTips.doc} \item Herding Passionate Cats: The Role of Facilitator in a Peer Learning, \url{http://pippabuchanan.com/2011/09/04/herding-passionate-cats-the-role-of-facilitator-in-a-peer-learning-process/} \item Reflective Peer Facilitation: Crafting Collaborative Self-Assessment, by Dale Vidmar, Southern Oregon University Library, \href{http://webpages.sou.edu/\%7Evidmar/SOARS2008/vidmar.ppt}{http://webpages.sou.edu/\ensuremath{\sim}vidmar/SOARS2008/vidmar.ppt} \item Important tips for effective co facilitation by Everywoman's center University of Massachussetts, \url{http://www.umass.edu/ewc/ea/Facilitation\%20Skills/important\%20tips.doc} \end{itemize} \textbf{Resources} \begin{itemize} \item Co facilitation skills. Training Topic, \url{http://www.scribd.com/doc/54544925/51/TRAINING-TOPIC-Co-facilitation-skills} \item Co facilitating.Advantages or disadvantages. J.Willam Pfeifer and John E Johnes, \url{http://www.breakoutofthebox.com/Co-FacilitatingPfeifferJones.pdf} \item A summary of John Heron's model about what facilitators do, \url{http://reviewing.co.uk/archives/art/13\_1\_what\_do\_facilitators\_do.htm\#8\_WAYS\_OF\_FACILITATING\_ACTIVE\_LEARNING} \item Freedom to learn by Carl Rogers, \url{http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-rogers.htm} \item Peer mediation, \url{http://www.studygs.net/peermed.htm} \item Co-Facilitation: The Advantages and Challenges, Canadian Union of Public Employees, \url{http://sk.cupe.ca/updir/cofacilitation-handouts.doc} \item Bohemia Interactive Community Wiki Guidelines, \url{http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Bohemia\_Interactive\_Community:Guidelines} \item Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1998) \emph{Carl Roger's Helping System. Journey and substance}, London: Sage. \item Wikipedia: 5 Pillars \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Five\_pillars\&oldid=501472166} \item US Army (2002--10--22). \emph{Training the Force (FM--07)}. US Army. \href{http://www.army.mil/features/FM7/FM\%207-0.pdf}{http://www.army.mil/features/FM7/FM\%207--0.pdf} \end{itemize} \chapter[\textbf{Designs for co-working}]{ Paragogical designs for co-working } One newcomer to the Peeragogy project said that from his point of view, peeragogy ``appears to focus on academia''. I think many of us would agree that this was never our intent --- though a quick search reveals that many, if not most, articles in the handbook mention the word ``student'' (for example). This page will develop the productive ``paragogical'' side of p\ae ragogy through a discussion of the strategies, joys, and sorrows of co-working. It will complement the \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/freelinking/Co-Working}{Co-facilitation} page. \section{Some guiding questions} These questions could apply to our working group(s) here, and to pretty much any working group in existence: \begin{itemize} \item How do you pass the ball? \item How do you keep the energy going? \item How do you diagnose where the group is going and make things ``intentional'' instead of assumed? \item And how do we do all of this in a way that takes learning into account? \end{itemize} \section{Rules} These come from \href{http://blog.startwithwhy.com/refocus/2011/07/you-are-allowed.html}{Simon Sinek} c/o Fabrizo Terzi and the Free Technology Guild: \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=3in]{./pictures/allowed-list.jpg} \end{center} \end{figure} \section{Co-working as the flip side of convening} Linus Torvalds, interviewed by Steven Vaughan-Nichols for an Hewlett-Packard publication, had this to say about software development: \begin{quotation} \emph{The first {[}mistake{]} is thinking that you can throw things out there and ask people to help. That's not how it works. You make it public, and then you assume that you'll have to do all the work, and ask people to come up with suggestions of what you should do, not what they should do. Maybe they'll start helping eventually, but you should start off with the assumption that you're going to be the one maintaining it and ready to do all the work. The other thing---and it's kind of related---that people seem to get wrong is to think that the code they write is what matters. No, even if you wrote 100\% of the code, and even if you are the best programmer in the world and will never need any help with the project at all, the thing that really matters is the users of the code. The code itself is unimportant; the project is only as useful as people actually find it. } \end{quotation} It is important to understand your users --- and remember that contributors are a special class of ``user'' with a real time investment in the way the project works. We typically cannot ``Tom Sawyer'' ourselves into leisure or ease just because we manage to work collaboratively, or just because we have found people with some common interests. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=4in]{./pictures/work.jpeg} \end{center} \end{figure} The truth is probably somewhere in between Torvalds and Twain. Many people actively want to contribute! For example, on ``Wikipedia, the encyclopedia anyone can edit'' (as of 2011) \href{http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/wikipedias\_goal\_1\_billion\_monthly\_visitors\_by\_2015.php}{as many as} 80,000 visitors make 5 or more edits per month. This is interesting to compare with the \href{http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia}{fact} that (as of 2006) ``over 50\% of all the edits are done by just .7\% of the users 524 people. And in fact the most active 2\%, which is 1400 people, have done 73.4\% of all the edits.'' Similar numbers, though on a smaller scale, apply \href{http://lalashan.mcmaster.ca/theobio/mathwikis/index.php/PlanetMathEncyclopedia}{on PlanetMath}, where the top 100 users have written about 75\% of the site. \section{A little theory} In many natural systems, things are not distributed equally, and it is not atypical for e.g. 20\% of the population to control 80\% of the wealth (or, as we saw, for 2\% of the users to do nearly 80\% of the edits). Many, many systems work like this, so maybe there's a good reason for it.Let's think about it in terms of ``coordination'' as thought of by the late Elinor Ostrom. She talked about ``local solutions for local problems''. By definition, such geographically-based coordination requires close proximity. What does ``close'' mean? If we think about homogeneous space, it just means that we draw a circle (or sphere) around where we are, and the radius of this circle (resp. sphere) is small. An interesting \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-sphere\#Volume\_and\_surface\_area}{mathematical fact} is that as the dimension grows, the volume of the sphere gets ``thinner'', so the radius must increase to capture the same \emph{d}-dimensional volume when \emph{d} grows! Based on this, we might guess that the more dimensions a problem has, the more resources we will need to solve it. From another perspective, the more different factors impact a given issue, in some sense, the less likely there are to be small scale, self-contained, ``local problems'' in the first place.If we think about networks instead of homogeneous space, and notice that some nodes in the network have more connections than others, then we see the same issue applies to these nodes: they have more complexity in their immediate region than the others. This might suggest that such ``central nodes'' (e.g. popular films, popular words, popular websites, popular people) would, by definition, be less discriminating in terms of who/what they couple with. On a certain level (weak ties) this is probably true. But on another level (strong ties) I think it must not be true --- you can't really have it both ways.Asking for organizations to work on the ``local'' level of strong ties when they are ``really'' all about many low-bandwidth weak ties isn't likely to work well. Google is happy to serve everyone's web requests --- but they can't have just anyone walking in off the street and connecting devices their network in Mountain View. (Aside: the 2006 article on Wikipedia quoted above was written by Aaron Swartz, who achieved some \href{http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/07/swartz-arrest/}{notoriety} for doing essentially just that, though in his case, it was MIT's network, not Google's.) We might guess that the more institutionally committed someone is, the less likely they are to be able to form deep connections with anyone who is not an integral part of their institution.Of course, we don't ``give up''. We aspire to create systems that have both aspects, systems where a ``dedicated individual can rise to the top through dint of effort'', etc. These systems are well articulated, almost like natural languages, which are so expressive and adaptive that ``most sentences have never been said before''. In other words, a well-articulated system does lend itself to ``local solutions to local problems'' --- but only because all words are NOT created equal. \begin{quotation}\emph{My brothers read a little bit. Little words like If and It. My father can read big words, too. Like CONSTANTINOPLE and TIMBUKTU.} \end{quotation} \subsection{Co-working: what is an institution?} We could talk in this section about Coase's theory of the firm, and Benkler's theory of ``Coase's Penguin''. We might continue \href{http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/perfectinstitutions}{quoting} from Aaron Swartz. But we will not get so deep into that here. Instead, in the following section, we will look at an example. \section[Designing a platform for peer learning]{``How can I use Peeragogy to design a platform for peer learning?'' - A case study} I will elaborate some on the PlanetMath case, which I've also described in overview in my ``Learn Math(s) the Hard(er) Way'' \href{http://metameso.org/\ensuremath{\sim}joe/docs/lmthw-talk.pdf}{talk} and \href{http://campus.ftacademy.org/wiki/index.php/Seed\_Project:\_Learn\_Math\_the\_Hard\_Way}{project proposal} (and will discuss in greater depth in my thesis).In short, I lumped the different activities that people could do on PlanetMath into 5 categories (see table). The five categories (Context, Engagement, Quality, Structure, and Heuristic) come from reflecting on the \href{http://paragogy.net}{5 paragogy principles}, and comparing them with the Martin Nowak's \href{http://www.sciencemag.org/content/314/5805/1560.full}{5 rules for the evolution of cooperation}, then clustering the actual activities that people can do on PlanetMath (as well as some new planned activities) into these categories. I also drew inspiration from the pattern and heuristic ``language'' we proposed on the \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns-usecases/}{Patterns} page --- in short, I clustered the diagram on that page into 5 segments, corresponding to the categories mentioned above. \begin{itemize} \item Context \ensuremath{\sim} Changing context as a decentered center. \ensuremath{\sim} kin selection \item Engagement \ensuremath{\sim} Meta-learning as a font of knowledge. \ensuremath{\sim} direct reciprocity \item Quality \ensuremath{\sim} Peers provide feedback that wouldn't be there otherwise. \ensuremath{\sim} indirect reciprocity \item Structure \ensuremath{\sim} Learning is distributed and nonlinear. \ensuremath{\sim} spatial selection \item Heuristic \ensuremath{\sim} Realize the dream if you can, then wake up! \ensuremath{\sim} group selection \end{itemize} The analogies are not perfect, and are meant to help inspire, rather than to constrain, thoughts on the learning/platform design. Keeping in mind that this language used here is metaphorical, and that Nowak's formalism is meant to be general, describing all different kinds of collaboration ---\emph{In a ``kin selection'' regime, we are working in a ``generational'' modality; we are looking at what is ``related'', and this helps to define that which is ``unrelated'' --- the other.} On PlanetMath, the most important senses of ``relatedness'' apply to elements of the subject domain. Topics that are linked to one another in the encyclopedia are related. These links can either be implicit term references (which are spotted by PlanetMath's autolinker), or more explicit connections added by authors, reders, or editors. Such links can build an implicit context for a ``newcomer'' who approaches a given topic. \emph{In a ``direct reciprocity'' regime, we ``learning about ourselves'' in practice, usually in a social context.} One of the key legacy features of PlanetMath is that every object in the system is ``discussable''. You can ask a question about an encyclopedia article, for example, and this will go into a common pool of questions. One of the driving ideas behind the site's (re)design is that every question should help us improve the site, for example, by pointing out a place where the original expository article could be improved. Of course, at the most basic level, we hope that the questions receive good one-off answers (providing a benefit to the initial question-asker). Even the most simple question is a ``constructively critical'' question. On the level of site semantics, it would be good to keep track of which questions have been answered, and which have not. Questions can be ``mutated'' into corrections, requests, or mathematical problems to solve. \emph{In an ``indirect reciprocity'' regime, we are building something that may be useful later on.} Another important legacy feature of PlanetMath is that, unlike Wikipedia, articles are not generally open to the public to edit (though some are). Rather, the typical process of ``crowdsourcing'' takes place through a corrections mechanism. From an analytical perspective, we might expect corrections to be one of the key ways in which site authors learn from one another. In a sense, the opportunity to get corrections or suggestions pointed out later might be one of the biggest incentives for writing an article in the first place! Offering a correction to someone else is, of course, a way to point out one's own knowledgability (as such, a sort of flip-side of asking questions). Certain behaviors can help one develop a good reputation (though PlanetMath does not model this very explicitly)\ldots{} and perhaps even more importantly, a high-quality resource ``emerges'' from such one-to-one interactions. \emph{In a ``spatial selection'' regime, we are again defining an ``inside'' and ``outside'', and looking for ways in which the structures that we have identified can fit together.} One of the features that the legacy version of PlanetMath lacked was any sort of support for ``problem solving behavior'' --- which, in mathematics, is actually a pretty essential thing. Rather, the site was set up as a ``reference'' tool for people who solved problems elsewhere. By moving support for problems, solutions, and reviews onto the PlanetMath site itself, we expect not only to open the ``marketplace'' up to new kinds of learners (i.e. people working at a more basic level than encylopedia authoring OR people working at a fairly advanced level who are more interested in applications than in theory), but also to get significant improvements to the core knowledge resource itself (the encyclopedia). This is because ``an article without an attached problem'' is not a very practical article from a learning or application standpoint. Similarly, ``a problem without a solution'' is lacking something, as is ``a solution without a review''. Building support for this, and support for people to structure/stage problems with problem sets should help make the site a much more practically useful learning tool. \emph{In a ``group selection'' regime, we are building ``sets'' of activities and patterns (milestones, roles) which can then act as ``selectors'' for behavior. (This is why I've combined it with the catch-all ``heuristic'' category.)} Another historical weak point of the legacy site was support for ``teams''. Thus, for example, one effort to improve PlanetMath's coverage of topics in Real Analysis foundered --- because there was no way to gather a critical mass to this project. There are social, technical, and knowledge aspects to this problem. Co-working requires people to be able to join groups, and it requires the groups to be able to structure their workflow. In some sense this is similar to an individual's work being structured by the use of heuristics. A person's choice to apply this strategy instead of that one, or to join this group instead of that one, is in the end a somewhat similar choice. These notes have shown how the paragogical principles, supplimented with very general theories of collaboration, and some practical observations as examined in the Peeragogy Handbook, can help design a space for learning, which is itself a ``learning space'' in the sense of knowledge building. Although the case study has focused on mathematics learning, similar reflections would apply to designing other sorts of learning spaces (e.g. to the continued development of the Peeragogy project itself!). \part{Assessment} \chapter[\textbf{Peeragogical Assessment}]{Introduction to Peeragogical Assessment} This article will be about both (a) assessment in peer learning and (b) an exercise in assessment, as we will try to put our strategy for assessment into practice by evaluating the \href{http://peeragogy.org}{Peeragogy Handbook} itself. \subsection{THINKING ABOUT ``CONTRIBUTION''} It is intuitive to say: ``learning is adaptation.'' What else would it be? Further, since adaptation happens not just on the individual level, but also on the socio-cultural level --- anthropologists use the phrase ``adaptive strategy'' as a synonym for ``culture'' --- we can say that contributions to social adaptation are ``paragogical.'' \subsection{ADAPTING STRATEGIES FOR LEARNING ASSESSMENTTO THE PEER LEARNING CONTEXT} In ``\href{http://books.google.com/books?id=EJxy06yX\_NoC\&printsec=frontcover\&source=gbs\_atb\#v=onepage\&q\&f=false}{Effective Grading: A Tool for Learning and Assessment},'' Barbara E. Walvoord and Virginia Johnson Anderson have outlined an approach to grading. They address three questions: \begin{enumerate} \item Who needs to know, and why? \item Which data are collected? \item How does the assessment body analyze data and present findings? \end{enumerate} The authors suggest that institutions, departments, and assessment committees should begin with these simple questions and work from them towards anything more complex. These simple questions provide a way to understand --- and assess --- any strategy for assessment! For example, consider ``formative assessment'' --- \begin{quote} ``\ldots{}which involves constantly monitoring student understanding through a combination of formal and informal measures. Teachers ask searching questions, listen over the shoulders of students working together on a problem, help students assess their own work, and carefully uncover students' thinking {[}and{]} react to what they learn by adjusting their teaching, thereby leading students to greater understanding.'' (Quote from the website for the book ``New Frontiers in Formative Assessment''.) \end{quote} In this context, our answers to the questions above would be: \begin{enumerate} \item Teachers need to know about the way students are thinking about their work, so they can deliver better teaching. \item Teachers gather lots of details on learning activities by ``listening over the shoulders'' of students. \item Teachers apply (hopefully well-informed) analysis techniques that come from their training or experience --- and they do not necessarily present their assessments to students directly, but rather, feed it back in the form of improved teaching. \end{enumerate} This is very much a ``teacher knows best'' model! In order to do something like formative assessment among peers, we would have to make quite a few adjustments. \begin{enumerate} \item At least some of the project participants would have to know how participants are thinking about their work. We might not be able to ``deliver better teaching,'' but perhaps we could work together to problem-solve when difficulties arise. \item It may be most convenient for each participant to take on a share of the work, e.g. by maintaining a ``learning journal'' (which could be shared with other participants). This imposes a certain overhead, but as we remarked elsewhere, ``meta-learning is a font of knowledge''! Outside of self-reflection, details about others' learning can sometimes be abstracted from their contributions to the project (``learning analytics'' is a whole topic unto itself). \item If a participant in a ``learning project'' is bored, frustrated, feeling closed-minded, or for whatever other reason ``not learning'', then there is definitely a question. But for whom? For the person who isn't learning? For the collective as a whole? We may not have to ponder this conundrum for long: if we go back to the idea that ``learning is adaptation'', someone who is not learning in a given context will likely leave, and find another context where they can learn more. \end{enumerate} This is but one example of an assessment strategy: in addition to ``formative assessment'', ``diagnostic'' and ``summative'' strategies are also quite popular in mainstream education. The main purpose of this section has been to show that when the familiar roles from formal education devolve ``to the people'', the way assessment looks can change a lot. In the following section, we offer and begin to implement an assessment strategy for evaluating the peeragogy project as a whole. \subsection{A CASE STUDY IN PEERAGOGICAL EVALUATION: THE PEERAGOGY PROJECT} We can evaluate this project partly in terms of its main ``deliverable,'' the Peeragogy Handbook (which you are now reading). In particular, we can ask: Is this handbook useful for its intended audience? The ``intended audience'' could potentially include anyone who is participating in a peer learning project, or who is thinking about starting one. We can also evaluate the learning experience that the co-creators of this handbook have had. Has working on this book been a useful experience for those involved? These are two very different questions, with two different targets for analysis --- though the book's co-creators are also part of the ``intended audience''. Indeed, we might start by asking ``has working on this book been useful for us?'' For me (Joe) personally, it has been useful: \emph{to see some more abstract, conceptual, and theoretical ideas (paragogy.net) extended into practical advice (which I'm sure I can personally use), with references to literature I would not have come up with in library or internet searches, and with a bunch of ideas and insights that I wouldn't have come up with on my own. I definitely intend to use this handbook further in my work.} It's true; I do see myself as one of the more involved participants to date, which stands to reason since I'm actually paid to research peer learning, and this project is (in my opinion) one of the most cutting-edge places to talk about that topic! If ``you get out of it what you put into it'' is true, then, again, as a major contributor, I think I ``deserve'' a lot. And I'm certainly not the only one: quite a large number of person-hours have been poured into this project by quite a number of volunteers. This should say something! Nevertheless, one does not need to be a ``handbook contributor'' at all to get value from the project: if it was otherwise, we might as well just get rid of the book after writing it. Actually, our thought is that this work will indeed have ``value'' for downstream users, and our choice of legal terms around the book reflects that idea. Anyone downstream is free to use the contents of this book for any purpose whatsoever. For all we know, there will be future users who will add much more to the study and practice of paragogy/peeragogy than any of us have so far. This could happen by putting the ideas to the test, feeding back information on the results to the project (\href{http://peeragogy.org/contact/}{please do}! - the ultimate assessment of the Peeragogy Handbook will be based on what people actually \emph{do} with it): perhaps further developing the book, developing additional case studies or recipes, and so forth. In fact, questions about ``usefulness'' are what we aim to study in our ``alpha testing'' phase (which is beginning now!). \subsection{CONCLUSION} We can estimate individual learning by examining the real problems solved by the individual. Sometimes those are solved in collaboration with others. If someone only consumes information, they may well be ``learning'', but there is no way for us to measure that. On the other hand, if they only solve ``textbook problems'', again, they may be learning and gaining intuition (which is good), but it is still not 100\% clear that they are actually learning anything ``useful'' until they start solving problems that they really care about! So, to assess learning, we do not just measure ``contribution'' (in terms of quantity of posts or what have you) but instead we measure ``contribution to solving real problems''. Sometimes that happens very slowly, with lots of practice along the way. Furthermore, at any given point in time, some of the ``problems'' are actually quite fun and are ``solved'' by playing! Indeed (as people like Piaget and Vygotsky recognized), if we're interested to know real experts on learning, we should talk with kids, since they learn tons and tons of things. \subsection{RECOMMENDED READING} \begin{itemize} \item Chris Morgan, Meg O'Reilly, \href{http://books.google.com/books/about/Assessing\_Open\_and\_Distance\_Learners.html?id=wZcihyWRdIIC}{Assessing Open and distance learners (1999), Open University} \item Jan Philipp Schmidt, Christine Geith, Stian Håklev, and Joel Thierstein, Peer-To-Peer Recognition of Learning in Open Education, \url{http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/641/1389} \item L.S. Vygotsky: \href{http://books.google.com/books?id=RxjjUefze\_oC\&printsec=frontcover\&source=gbs\_atb\#v=onepage\&q\&f=false}{Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes} \item \href{http://org.sagepub.com/search?author1=Reijo+Miettinen\&sortspec=date\&submit=Submit}{Reijo Miettinen} and \href{http://org.sagepub.com/search?author1=Jaakko+Virkkunen\&sortspec=date\&submit=Submit}{Jaakko Virkkunen}, Epistemic Objects, Artifacts and Organizational Change, \emph{Organization,} May 2005 ,12: 437--456, \url{http://org.sagepub.com/content/12/3/437.abstract} \end{itemize} \subsection{APPENDIX: OVERVIEW OF TOPICS IN ASSESSMENT} \begin{itemize} \item Diagnostic, formative and summative evaluation \item Competency-based learning \item Experiential learning \end{itemize} \textbf{UNIT OF ANALYSIS} \begin{itemize} \item individual \item group/team \item class \item course \item program \item organization \end{itemize} PURPOSE \begin{itemize} \item diagnostic \item formative \item summative \end{itemize} FEEDBACK SOURCE \begin{itemize} \item peer \item pedadogical authority \item content expert \item group \item public \end{itemize} MODELS: \begin{itemize} \item Peer assessment \item Self-assessment \item Norm-referenced testing \item Criterion-referenced testing \item Information-referenced testing \item Writing \item Transmedia/e-portfolios \end{itemize} OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: \begin{itemize} \item Suitability to task \item Suitability to learner's desired/expected outcomes (e.g., ``If I want to master a skill, I need more expert/critical/constructive feedback than someone clicking a `like' button.'') \item Capital: time, money, energy, ROI \item Future documentary usage \item professional guidelines \end{itemize} ADDITIONAL RESOURCES: \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/assessing/peereval.htm}{Peer and self-assessment} (from National Capital Language Resource Center) \item Steven Jay Gould's \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Mismeasure\_of\_Man}{\emph{The Mismeasure of Man}} \item \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-\_and\_Peer-Assessment}{Wikipedia entry on peer and self-assessment} \item \href{http://www.elearning-reviews.org/topics/pedagogy/assessment/1999-boud-et-al-peer-learning-assessment/}{Assessment as it relates to peer learning in university courses} \item \href{http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED501727}{Self, peer, and group assessment in e-learning} \item \href{http://www.hepg.org/hep/book/151}{New Frontiers in Formative Assessment} \end{itemize} \chapter[\textbf{Following the money}]{ Following the money, assessing profitablity } Summary: The metrics for learning in corporation are business metrics. Subsequent to learning, has the workers' performance changed for the better? \subsection{Follow the money} \href{http://vimeo.com/45989089}{Assessing Workplace Learning} from \href{http://vimeo.com/user7021511}{Jay Cross} on \href{http://vimeo.com}{Vimeo}.When people ask about the ROI of informal learning, ask them how they measure the ROI of formal learning. Test scores, grades, self-evaluations, attendance, and certifications prove nothing.The ROI of any form of learning is the value of changes in behavior divided by the cost of inducing the change. Like the tree falling over in the forest with no one to hear it, if there's no change in behavior over the long haul, no learning took place.ROI is in the mind of the beholder, in this case, the sponsor of the learning who is going to decide whether or not to continue investing. Because the figure involves judgment, it's never going to be accurate to the first decimal place. Fortunately, it doesn't have to be. Ballpark numbers are solid enough for making decisions.The process begins before the investment is made. What degree of change will the sponsor accept as worthy of reinvestment? How are we going to measure that? What's an adequate level of change? What's so low we'll have to adopt a different approach? How much of the change can we attribute to learning? You need to gain agreement on these things beforehand. Monday morning quarterbacking is not credible.It's crazy to assess learning immediately after it occurs. You can see if people are taking part or if they're complaining about getting lost, but you cannot assess what sticks until the forgetting curve has ravaged the learners' memories for a few months. Without reinforcement, people forget most of what they learn in short order.It's beguiling to try to correlate the impact of learning with existing financial metrics like increased revenues or better customer service scores. Done on its own, this approach rarely works because learning is but one of many factors that influence results. Was today's success due to learning or the ad campaign or weak competition or the sales contest or something else?The way to assess how people learn is to ask them. How did you figure out how to do this? Who did you learn this from? How did that change your behavior? How can we make it better?Too time consuming? Not if you interview a representative sample. For example, interviewing less than 100 people out of 2000 yields an answer within 10\% nineteen times out of twenty, a higher confidence level than most estimates in business. Interviewing 150 people will give you the right estimate 99\% of the time. \part{~~Patterns, Use Cases, and Examples} \chapter[\textbf{Thinking about patterns}]{Thinking about patterns} A \emph{\textbf{pattern}} is anything that happens over and over again. In the context of peeragogy, we mean that happens often that we also often like, or want, or think is useful for some purpose. Thing that happen a lot but are not desirable are often called \emph{anti-patterns}! Feel free to point out both patterns and anti-patterns that you observe in the current context or that you remember from or observe in other peer learning or peer production experiences. \subsection{What is a \emph{use case}?} A \emph{\textbf{use case}} describes someone (or something) who uses a given system or tool to achieve a goal. When writing a use case, presented it with a title (which serves as a brief summary), a main actor and a success scenario. Additional features can be added, such as alternate interaction paths leading to a variation on the result. Use cases and patterns are related, in that a pattern is generally supposed to be useful for something. A use case can indicate how that works. (A technology-oriented list of use cases is presented in the Technologies, Services, and Platforms section.) \subsection{What do you get when you put these together?} Combine patterns and use cases and you start to get something called a ``\emph{\textbf{pattern language}}`\,'. See the section on ``Patterns and Heuristics'', below, for one such representation (drawing on the relationships between patterns for organizing peer learning, and known problem-solving techniques). This approach could be useful for understanding a person's learning curve within a given domain, as a sort of ``map'', on which we can see a higher-order pattern of development (or at least a higher-order pattern of attention). See the page ``\href{http://peeragogy.org/researching-paeragogy/}{Researching pæragogy}'' for more discussion of these themes. \section{Patterns and Heuristics} This section draws some parallels between ``Minskian heuristics for problem solving'', and our patterns peeragogy (see below). The heuristics (which Marvin Minsky discusses in a series of \href{http://web.media.mit.edu/\ensuremath{\sim}minsky/OLPC-1.html}{m}\href{http://web.media.mit.edu/\ensuremath{\sim}minsky/OLPC-2.html}{e}\href{http://web.media.mit.edu/\ensuremath{\sim}minsky/OLPC-3.html}{m}\href{http://web.media.mit.edu/\ensuremath{\sim}minsky/OLPC-4.html}{o}\href{http://web.media.mit.edu/\ensuremath{\sim}minsky/OLPC-5.html}{s} for the One Laptop Per Child project) can be summed up with the following diagram: \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=4in]{./pictures/heuristic-images.jpg} \end{center} \end{figure} We can see some relationships to the peeragogy patterns we've identified, first summed up with a picture here, and in text below (some of the nodes in the diagram are clickable, and clicking will take you to the page describing that pattern!): To elaborate in words: - We \emph{simplify} things for a \textbf{Newcomer}. (In particular, this means that we don't expect the newcomer to use a high processing level.) - We \emph{change focus} by using a \textbf{Roadmap} to guide us from one step to another. In addition, the project's \textbf{Heartbeat} leads us to let go of our focus at one moment, and resume with another point of view later. - We \emph{change description} first of all by having a \textbf{Wrapper} who describes the new state of the project. For the Peeragogy project, that often meant summing up the high points that we saw over a given period of time. It seems possible that with a rich enough\textbf{ Pattern Language}, the description would itself be made in terms of patterns. - We \emph{divide} work up not only ``horizontally'' among different \textbf{Roles}, but also ``temporally'' by using the \textbf{Roadmap}. Someone who is moving ahead with the Roadmap is likely to be ``working at the cutting edge''. - When we \emph{find an analogy}, we are basically \textbf{Creating a Guide} of some sort. This can be used as a form of ``exploration'', as we look at how one form of engagement may or may not map onto other forms of engagement. - When we \emph{ask for help}, we may avail ourselves of some \textbf{Moderation} service that will decide how to deal with our request. One simple way to ask for help is \textbf{Polling for Ideas}. Obviously once we start to get help, we're working in a regime of ``collaborative effort''. - If you \emph{know the answer}, then you may be able to reuse it (which is the basic idea described in \textbf{Praxis vs Poesis}, though the title is a little bit obscure). Someone who knows the answer and who is good at self-explanation may also have a good idea about how to get from the current state to the goal state; alternatively, this may be broken down into steps in some sub-Roadmap, and moving from step to step would then illustrate ``progressive problem solving''. - It is important to \emph{give it a rest} so as not to over-exhaust oneself, busting one's own \textbf{Carrying Capacity}, or, alternatively, overwhelming the group. - It seems that one of the things that \emph{experts do} is \textbf{Discerning a Pattern}. This allows them to simplify their processing. - Finally, again, if we \emph{know why it is hard}, then we may be able to\textbf{ Create a Guide} that will help get around, or at least better cope with, the difficulty. \subsection{Patterns of Peeragogy} Here is our index of the patterns mentioned above, each on its own page linked below: \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/heartbeat/}{Heartbeat} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/carrying-capacity/}{Carrying Capacity} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/creating-a-guide/}{Creating a Guide} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/discerning-a-pattern/}{Discerning a Pattern} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/moderation/}{Moderation} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/newcomer/}{Newcomer} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/pattern-language/}{Pattern Language} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/polling-for-ideas/}{Polling for Ideas} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/praxis-vs-poeisis/}{Praxis vs Poeisis} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/roadmap/}{Roadmap} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/roles/}{Roles} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/patterns/wrapper/}{Wrapper} \end{itemize} \subsection{Use Cases for Peeragogy} We also have a variety of hypothetical use cases to explore: \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/from-peer-production-to-peer-learning/}{From peer production to peer learning} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/cest-la-vie/}{C'est la vie} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/distributed-project-management/}{Distributed Project Management} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/improved-adaptivity/}{Improved adaptivity} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/improving-the-efficacy-of-research-funding/}{Improving the efficacy of research funding} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/journalist-enters-the-whispering-gallery/}{Journalist enters the Whispering Gallery} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/living-the-oer-dream/}{Living the OER dream} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/making-our-own-tools/}{Making our own tools} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/paragogy/}{Paragogy} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/peer-learning-on-the-technical-edge/}{Peer Learning on the Technical Edge} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/prolegomena-to-any-future-math-learning-environment/}{Prolegomena to Any Future Math Learning Environment} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/paeragogy-helps-solve-complex-problems/}{Pæragogy helps solve complex problems} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/starting-a-company/}{Starting a Company} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/steal-this-book/}{Steal This Book} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/strategy-as-learning/}{Strategy as learning} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/we-are-the-1-percent/}{We are the 1 percent} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/use-cases/young-aspiring-blogger-wants-to-avoid-starvation/}{Young aspiring blogger wants to avoid starvation} \end{itemize} \subsection{Anti-patterns for Peeragogy} And some Anti-patterns (things not to do)! \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/isolation/}{Isolation} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/magical-thinking/}{Magical thinking} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/co-learning-messy-with-lurkers/}{Messy with Lurkers} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/misunderstanding-power/}{Misunderstanding Power} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/navel-gazing/}{Navel Gazing} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/stasis/}{Stasis} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/stuck-at-the-level-of-weak-ties/}{Stuck at the level of weak ties} \end{itemize} \section{Examples} The above use cases and patterns make the ``story'' abstract --- but how about some concrete examples of peeragogy in action? Consider: \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://openhatch.org/}{OpenHatch.org}, ``an open source community aiming to \textbf{help newcomers find their way} into free software projects.'' \item The \href{http://campus.ftacademy.org/wiki/index.php/Free\_Technology\_Guild}{Free Technology Guild} is a younger project with aspirations similar in some ways to those of OpenHatch, but in this case, oriented not just to pairing newcomers with mentors, but pairing clients with service providers. ``The idea is that we as a group will do useful projects for our members or external parties, and \textbf{on-the-job we mentor and learn and get better}.'' (Since this is a new project, the \href{http://campus.ftacademy.org/community/pg/groups/8500/free-technology-guild-working-group/}{project building phase} is itself a nacent example of paragogy.) \item Many more examples on our \href{http://peeragogy.org/examples/}{examples} page! \end{itemize} \subsection{Resources and References} \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Timeless\_Way\_of\_Building}{The Timeless Way of Building} (Wikipedia page) \end{itemize} An elegant book (as is most of Christopher Alexander's writing). If you can find it in your library it is worth a read. If you want to start out with something smaller, there's a cool essay by Christopher Alexander called \href{http://www.rudi.net/pages/8755}{A City is Not a Tree}, available online. \begin{itemize} \item \url{http://dreamsongs.net/Files/PatternsOfSoftware.pdf} \end{itemize} This is a famous book by Richard Gabriel, who applies the ``pattern'' idea to software and programming languages. \chapter[\textbf{Patterns}]{ Patterns } \section{ Heartbeat } In the ``Collaborative Lesson Planning'' course led by Charlie at P2PU (which I joined twice, and where we first talked through the ideas about paragogy), Charlie wrote individual emails to people who were signed up for the course and who didn't participate. This kept some of us (including me!) on track. Without someone or something acting as the ``heartbeat'' for the group, energy may dissipate. \section{ Carrying Capacity } ``The carrying capacity of a biological species in an environment is the maximum population size of the species that the environment can sustain indefinitely, given the food, habitat, water and other necessities available in the environment.'' --- \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying\_capacity} I have been concerned that I might over-contribute and ``drown out'' other voices here. There may be a certain threshold or throughput rate that the community can ``take'', and so, my active contributions (appreciated by some!) may be squeezing other people out. Or perhaps this view is too self-important, and relative quiet from other participants has little or nothing to do with me. After all, this is a digital space, and it does not have the same \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/choosing-how-little-structure}{characteristics} as a physical space would have. It is at times reminiscent of classroom experiences (as a student) where I did a lot of the ``dialog'' and other people were more quiet. I feel conflicted about this, since I feel I do not simply have ``a need to be vocal'' but rather a relatively extreme need (or, at least, taste) for dialog and exchange! I too have a certain ``carrying capacity'', a certain threshold or throughput rate for information digestion and production that I can ``take'' (or ``give'' - I think there's both, plus a certain rate that I ``require''). (Howard referred to a related idea elsewhere as ``infotention''; I don't know if it is the same idea that I'm describing here.) Despite the enjoyment I get from contributing here, I think I am starting to feel some of the symptoms of ``burn-out'', making me wonder, for example, if I should limit my participation to one or two days a week. This might bring my overall rate of participation closer to the average rate, which could (in theory) be ``good enough''! And it would (beneficially?) force me to work on \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/researching-p\%C3\%A6ragogy}{other things}. I categorize this post as a ``proposed pattern'', because I'm not sure about it. I don't think it's an anti-pattern, though it has a sort of bittersweet feel to it. It certainly doesn't mean that I'm leaving the project. Just trying to better understand the nature of my engagement, and that of others. Feedback on this issue is welcome. \section{ Creating a Guide } Meaning-carrying tools, like handbooks or maps, can help people use an idea. In particular, when the idea or system is only ``newly discovered'', the associated meanings may not be well understood (indeed they may not have been created). In such a case, the process of creating the guide can go hand-in-hand with figuring out how the system works. Thus, techniques of \href{http://knowledgecartography.org/}{knowledge cartography} and \href{http://www.hitl.washington.edu/publications/r-97-47/two.html}{meaning making} are useful for would-be guide creators. Even so, it is worth noting that ``the map is not the territory'', and map-making is only one facet of shared human activity. Note: I've tried to incorporate comments from Bob and Howard (above) into this pattern. I hope it comes across well. Many of the patterns suggested here should be refined collaboratively in the wiki. Collaboratively refining a pattern is itself an example of ``Creating a Guide'' --- that is, a pattern description can be thought of as a ``micro-map'' of a specific activity. \section{ Discerning a Pattern } {[}W{]}e saw that language use is typically what we have to go on, from an analytical perspective. Generally, if we are not starting with language, we arrive at it soon enough. Language becomes something to pay attention to, in much the same way in which Buddhist practitioners have for centuries spent time watching their breath. --- \url{http://paragogy.net/ParagogicalPraxisPaper} The challenge of discerning a pæragogical pattern typically comes down to the question ``What are we doing with language?'' For example, in building a peer learning profile someone might identify an interest (e.g. gardening, puns). We notice this is a pattern when it keeps happening (most participants have included some interests in their self-introductions). The classic example of a pattern from architecture is A Place to Wait --- something that comes up in a lot of architectural contexts. Once a (suspected) pattern is found, we give it a title and write down how using the pattern works in a peer learning context. In the current case, Discerning a Pattern helps us build our peer learning ``vocabulary'' or ``repertoire'' - it shows a specific kind of move that can be made by someone \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/what-purpose-objective-vision-peeragogy-project\#comment-1475}{navigating the pæragogical landscape}. (Exercise: write Pattern: Identifying an Interest) {[}As for where patterns would fit in the outline: I think any action at any level could be described as a pattern (e.g. Convening a Group, Finding Resources). From the initial outline, the items that seemed to me like they could be of particularly high importance as ``patterns'' were Creating a Division of Labor, Planning Learning Activities, and Peer Assessment - but this is only a subjective view. If we had to make a special category for Patterns, I would put them at the same level as Resources and Technologies --- they are, in a way, very light-weight ``social technologies''.{]} \section{ Moderation } ``Why is fishbowl more productive than debate? The small group conversations in the fishbowl tend to de-personalize the issue and reduce the stress level, making people's statements more cogent. Since people are talking with their fellow partisans, they get less caught up in wasteful adversarial games.'' --- \url{http://www.co-intelligence.org/y2k\_fishbowl.html} ``Fishbowl'' was \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/initial-rough-outline\#comment-1563}{introduced} by Howard in a discussion about peer facilitation. This sort of thing is actually likely to come up in peer learning a lot - an ``audience'' watching a friendly discussion. What's more rare is for the audience to then be called on to talk/present. Indeed, participation in online forums tends to follow a ``power law'' (see \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power\_law}), with unequal engagement. One remedy for this is simply for the most active participants to step back, and moderate how much they speak. OWS uses a similar technique in their ``\href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive\_stack}{progressive stack}''. \section{ Newcomer } Unless there is a new person to talk to, a lot of the ``education stuff'' we do could get kind of stale. Many of the patterns and use cases for peeragogy assume that there will be an audience or a new generation of learners --- hence things like Creating a Guide. Note that the Newcomer and the Wrapper may work together to make the project accessible. Even in the absence of actual newcomers, we're often asked to try and look at things with a ``beginner's mind''. Note: Regis has written some practical advice for things we can do on behalf of newcomers in this project, \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/suggest-new-discussion-topics\#comment-1796}{here}. \section{ Pattern Language } I use the idea of a ``Pattern Language'' as a shorthand for what Christopher Alexander talks about in this keynote address: \url{http://www.patternlanguage.com/archive/ieee/ieeetext.htm} In short, once we have come up with enough ``patterns'' (including the pattern of a ``pattern language'' that I am talking about here, and its generalizations per Christopher Alexander), then we will be better able to do both the socio-technical design work associated with planning pæragogical experiences, and, quite likely, enjoy the ``actual work'' more too. In this quote from the linked article, C. A. talks about computer programming, but I think the same could go for any other sort of design-and-implementation work: It is a view of programming as the natural genetic infrastructure of a living world which you/we are capable of creating, managing, making available, and which could then have the result that a living structure in our towns, houses, work places, cities, becomes an attainable thing. That would be remarkable. It would turn the world around, and make living structure the norm once again, throughout society, and make the world worth living in again. This is an extraordinary vision of the future, in which computers play a fundamental role in making the world --- and above all the built structure of the world --- alive, humane, ecologically profound, and with a deep living structure. \section{ Polling for Ideas } \ldots{} \textbf{\emph{and then Howard said }}\emph{``At the beginning, until we all know the ropes well enough to understand when to create a new discussion forum topic and when to add to an existing one, let's talk in this topic thread about what else we want to discuss and I will start new topic threads when necessary.''} Polling for Ideas can happen at many junctures in a peer learning experience, e.g. we could poll for ideas about ``who would we like to join our group?'', and ``what would be good resources for us to use?'' \section{ Praxis vs Poeisis } ``Praxis, a noble activity, is always one of use, as distinct from poesis which designates fabrication. Only the former, which plays and acts, but does not produce, is noble. (Baudrillard, 1975, p. 101)'' --- quoted in \url{http://paragogy.net/ParagogicalPraxisPaper} There is a tension between ``making stuff'' and ``using stuff''. Peer \emph{production, }as the name indicates, is about ``making stuff''. And stuff is, at least in theory, cool. On the other hand, does the world really need ``more stuff''? Why do we sometimes need to build or produce things? This is just the nature of life: humans cannot live on symbolic content alone, and in most climates fruit doesn't just fall from the trees ready to eat. On the other hand, technologies that move in the direction of ``post-scarcity economics'' may leave more time for the ``free play of ideas'' etc. If I could generalize, I think peeragogy has a more learning-oriented feel to it, whereas paragogy has a more production-oriented feel to it. Part of the ``idea'' in paragogy was to look at the ways in which learning and production are in fact related. But this is already a lot of semantic complexity, and I don't know how much we want to ``go there''. After all, it could just end up being an abstract discussion of symbols, whereas many folks have to get on with their work. Have I at least characterized the problem here? \textbf{Update:} Note that things like free software (and other related domains of peer production) are often ideal for work via techniques of \emph{assemblage}, AKA code reuse. So in this sort of domain a paragogical (productive) praxis (recombinant playing and acting) should be possible - and frequently done by e.g. web programmers. Cf. Yochai Benkler's requirements for Commons Based peer production: small pieces + support for integration. Now as for whether we ``should'' be productive - or do something else - this is really a different conversation. \textbf{Update:} I think this dichotomy is similar to ``play vs work'', cf this \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/games-and-learning\#comment-1740}{post/thread}. \section{ Roadmap } It is very useful to have an up-to-date public roadmap for the project, someplace where it can be discussed and maintained. This helps \textbf{newcomers }know where they can jump in. It also gives a sense of the accomplishments to date, and any major challenges that lie ahead. \textbf{Examples} \textbf{}In the Peeragogy project, now that the outline is fairly mature, we can use it as a roadmap, by marking the sections that are ``finished'' (at least in draft), marking the sections where editing is currently taking place, and marking the stubs (possible starting points for future contributors). While this does not provide a complete roadmap for all aspects of the project, it does give editors a sense of what is going on. \ldots{} And here is another example: \url{http://campus.ftacademy.org/wiki/index.php/Free\_Technology\_Guild\_Roadmap} \textbf{Update}: Note that a shared roadmap is very similar to a Personal Learning Plan, or ``pæragogical profile'', see for example: \url{http://campus.ftacademy.org/wiki/index.php/Free\_Technology\_Guild\#Learning\_design} (That said, keeping in mind the 4th paragogical principle, we cannot account for every eventuality! - nor should we try. The Roadmap exists as an artifact with which to share current, never complete, understanding of the space.) \section{ Roles } This may seem like an obvious one, but educational interactions tend to have a number of different roles associated with them. Consider that everything could bifurcate from the ``autodidact'': 1. Autodidact 2. Tutor-Tutee 3. Tutor-Tutee-Parent 5. Tutor-Tutee \#1-Tutee \#2-Parent-Principal etc., until we have bursars, librarians, technicians, janitors, editors of peer reviewed research journals, government policy makers, spin-off industrial ventures and partnerships, etc., all involved in Education. Even the autodidact may assume different roles at different points in time - sometimes making a library run, sometimes constructing a model, sometimes checking a proof. The decomposition of ``learning'' into different phases or polarities could be an endless theoretical task. For the moment, we just note that roles are often present ``by default'' at the start of a learning process, and that they may change as the process develops. \section{ Wrapper } Charlie Danoff \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/rolesdivision-labor}{suggests} that someone to take on the ``wrapper role'', in other words: do a pre/post wrap (e.g. weekly), so that new users know where the state of the project is at any given point in time. The project's \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/}{main page} also serves as a ``wrapper'', and it should be checked from time to time to make sure that it accurately represents the basic facts about the project. Note that the ``wrapper role'' is similar to the integrative function that is needed for commons-based peer production to work (i.e. according to the theory proposed by Yochai Benkler, it is vital to have both (1) the ability to contribute small pieces; (2) some ``integrative function'' that stitches those pieces together). \chapter[\textbf{Antipatterns}]{Antipatterns} This is another placeholder page to generate children. Later it could include instructions on how to come up with a good anti-pattern. Anti-patterns we've come up with so far... \section{ Isolation } (This is in some ways related to \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/anti-patterns-concerns-complaints-and-critiques\#comment-1808}{Participatory Design vs Navel Gazing}.) An effort that isolates itself - e.g. through lack of humility - will not have the occasion to draw on other resources. In popular discourse, idiosyncratic or asocial behavior is often casually referred to as ``\href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism}{autistic}'', which may indeed be a servicable metaphor (tho not without some caveats). As with the symptoms of autism, social isolation (of various forms) may have its roots in\emph{uncomfortably-intense} experiences of sensation. At the other end of the spectrum: it can of course be fun (and useful) to run into the same people or ideas in different contexts, to make connections in a creative way, to help others succeed. With a too-narrow focus (cf. the notion of ``\href{http://paragogy.net/ParagogyConcepts\#transversality}{transversality}''), people will bump into each other uncomfortably, or remain isolated; with a too-wide focus, everything is chaotic in other ways (see \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/anti-patterns-concerns-complaints-and-critiques\#comment-2146}{Co-Learning: Messy with Lurkers}), motivating a narrowing of focus. From a design point of view: we should be consious of interfaces that are ``too loud'', and think about how that is compensated for by isolation (of various forms). \section{ Magical thinking } «While the ideal platform would (magically) come with solutions pre-built, a more realistic approach recognizes that problem solving always takes time and energy. The problem solving approach and associated ``learning orientation'' will also depend on the task and resources at hand. {[}\ldots{}{]} Arguably, if we ``knew'', 100\%, how to do peeragogy, then we would not stand to learn very much by writing this handbook. Difficulties and tensions would be resolved ``in advance'' (see earlier comments about ``magical'' technologies for peer production).» ---\url{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/organizing-a-learning-context} Magical thinking of the kind described above robs a context of its ``process'' (Nishida might say, its ``motion''). It seems possible that the more structure we have ``in advance'', and the more we can fall back on ``traditional'' modes of doing things, the less we stand to learn. I quote at length: \begin{quotation} \emph{Optimization of decision-making processes confers an important advantage in response to a constantly changing environment. The ability to select the appropriate actions on the basis of their consequences and on our needs at the time of the decision allows us to respond in an efficient way to changing situations. However, the continuous control and attention that this process demands can result in an unnecessary expenditure of resources and can be inefficient in many situations. For instance, when behavior is repeated regularly for extensive periods without major changes in outcome value or contingency, or under uncertain situations where we cannot manipulate the probability of obtaining an outcome, general rules and habits can be advantageous. Thus, the more rapid shift to habits after chronic stress could be a coping mechanism to improve performance of well-trained behaviors, while increasing the bioavailability to acquire and process new information, which seems essential for adaptation to complex environments. However, when objectives need to be re-updated in order to make the most appropriate choice, the inability of stressed subjects to shift from habitual strategies to goal-directed behavior might be highly detrimental. Such impairment might be of relevance to understand the high comorbidity between stress-related disorders and addictive behavior or compulsivity, but certainly has a broader impact spanning activities from everyday life decisions to economics.} ---\url{http://www.sciencemag.org/content/325/5940/621.full} \end{quotation} This also has interesting implications when it comes to ``detecting learning'' (see ``\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/researching-p\%C3\%A6ragogy}{researching pæragogy}''). We could examine a question and hypothesis like the following: \begin{quotation} \emph{What if a negative emotional experience is like a ``hit'' of ``chronic stress'', inasmuch as it *temporarily* ratchets up the use of previously learned habits, and ratchets down the learning of new patterns? {[}\ldots{}{]} Situations in which we are adaptable (let's say, autonomous, not automaton-ish) could be taken to be the very *definition* of health - and positive emotional experiences could be found by ratcheting habit-use down, and pattern-learning up.} ---\url{http://gathatoulie.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/like-chronically-stressed-rat-looking.html} \end{quotation} \section{ Messy with Lurkers } Quoting \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/planning-learning-activities\#comment-2109}{from Gigi Johnson}: \begin{quotation} \emph{(1) Co-learning is Messy. It needs time, patience, confusion, re-forming, re-norming, re-storming, etc. Things go awry and part of norms needs to be how to realign.} \emph{(2) Co-learning is a VERY different experience from traditional teacher-led learning in terms of time and completion. It is frustrating, so many people will lurk or just step in and out, the latter of which is very different from what is acceptable in traditonal learning. Online learning programs are painted with the brush now of an ``unacceptable'' 50\% average non-completion rate. Stanford's MOOC AI class, which started out with +100,000 people, had 12\% finish. If only 12\% or 50\% of my traditional class finished, I'd have a hard time getting next quarter's classes approved! } \end{quotation} The second part is similar to the earlier Anti-pattern ``\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/anti-patterns-concerns-complaints-and-critiques\#comment-1854}{Misunderstanding Power (Laws)}''. People have to join in order to try, and when joining is low-cost, and completion low-benefit, it is not surprising that many people will ``dissipate'' as the course progresses. The ``messiness'' of co-learning is interesting because it points to a sort of ``internal dissipation'', as contributors bring their multiple different backgrounds, interests, and communication styles to bear. In \href{http://www.altchi.org/submissions/submission\_wmt\_0.pdf}{Tomlinson et al.}, we observed: \begin{quotation} \emph{More authors means more content, but also more words thrown away. Many of the words written by authors were deleted during the ongoing editing process. The sheer mass of deleted words might raise the question of whether authoring a paper in such a massively distributed fashion is efficient.} \end{quotation} If we were to describe this situation in traditional subject/object terms, we would say that peer production has a ``low signal to noise ratio''. However, it may be more appropriate (and constructive) to think of meanings as co-constructed as the process runs, and of messiness (or meaninglessness) as symptomatic, not of peer production \emph{itself}, but of deficiencies or infelicities in shared meaning-making and ``integrating'' features. \section{ Misunderstanding Power } ``Zipf's law states that given some corpus of natural language utterances, the frequency of any word is inversely proportional to its rank in the frequency table. Thus the most frequent word will occur approximately twice as often as the second most frequent word, three times as often as the third most frequent word, etc.'' Zipf's law (or other formulations of the same thing) govern the \href{http://www2.econ.uu.nl/users/marrewijk/geography/zipf/index.htm}{size of cities}, and related formulations describe \href{http://pricetags.wordpress.com/2010/10/26/kleibers-law-growth-and-creativity-in-cities/}{energy use}: roughly speaking, an elephant has a lower metabolism than a mouse and is more ``energy efficient''. At that same link, we see the suggestion that creativity in large-scale environments\emph{ speeds up!} \emph{The anti-pattern}: how many times have we been at a conference or workshop and heard someone say (or said ourselves) ``wouldn't it be great if this energy could be sustained all year 'round?'' Or in a classroom or peer production setting, wondered why it is that everyone does not participate equally. ``Wouldn't it be great if we could increase participation?'' If you believe the result above, large-scale participation would indeed tend to increase creativity! - But nevertheless, participation does tend to fall off according to \emph{some} power law (see Introduction to Power Laws in \href{http://www.theuncertaintyprinciple.danoff.org/v2i3.html}{The Uncertainty Principle, Volume II, Issue 3}), and it would be a grand illusion to assume that everyone is coming from a similar place with regard to the various literacies and motivations that are conducive to participation. Furthermore, a ``provisionist'' attitude (``If we change our system we will equalize participation and access'') simply will not work in general, \emph{since} \emph{power laws are inherently an epiphenomenon of networks}. Note that participation in a given activity often (but not always) falls off over \emph{time} as well. This effect seems related but is also not well understood (many people would like to write a hit song / best selling novel / start a religion / etc., but few actually do). See the anti-pattern ``\href{http://peeragogy.org/antipatterns/magical-thinking/}{Magical Thinking}'' for more on that. \emph{About the title}: Note that those agents who do post the most in a given collaboration (respectively, the words or ideas that are most common in a given language) will tend to influence the space the most. In this way, we can see some parallels between the \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic\_relativity}{Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis} and Bourdieu's notion of ``\href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic\_violence}{symbolic violence}''. Much as Paul Graham wrote about programming languages --- programmers are typically''satisfied with whatever language they happen to use, because it dictates the way they think about programs --- so too are people often ``satisfied'' with their social environments, because these tend to dictate the way they think and act in life. \section{ Navel Gazing } The difficulty I am referring to breaks down like this: 1. Certainly we cannot get things done just by talking about them. 2. And yet, feedback \emph{can} be useful, i.e., if there are mechanisms for responding to it in a useful fashion. 3. The associated \emph{anti-pattern} is a special case of the prototypical Bateson \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double\_bind}{double bind}, ``the father who says to his son, go ahead and criticize me - with the strong hint that all effective criticism will be very unwelcome.'' To sum up: criticism, and conversation more broadly, is not always ``useful''. Sometimes it is just ``noise''. \emph{The art of paragogical praxis is to make something useful out of what would otherwise just be noise.} PS: ``All talk and no action makes \ldots{}'' well, you know the meme, but do you know the Simpsons dubstep remix? \url{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycxwEiHf5xk}. Reference: \url{http://groups.google.com/group/p2pu-community/browse\_thread/thread/a066132808f7743b/faf22146aba92865} \section{ Stasis } Actually, of course, living beings are never \emph{really} in stasis. It just sometimes feels that way. Different anti-patterns like \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/anti-patterns-concerns-complaints-and-critiques\#comment-2267}{Isolation} or \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/anti-patterns-concerns-complaints-and-critiques\#comment-1808}{Navel-Gazing} have described different aspects of the \emph{experience} of feeling like one is in stasis. Typically, what is happening in such a case is that one or more dimensions of life are moving very slowly. For instance, it seems we are not able to get programming support to improve this version of the Social Media Classroom, for love or money, since all developer energy is going into the next version. This isn't true stasis, but it can feel frustrating when a specific small feature is desired, but unavailable. The solution? Don't get hung up on small things, and find the dimensions where movement \emph{is} possible. In a sense this is analogous to eating a balanced diet. You probably shouldn't only eat grilled cheese sandwiches, even if you like them a lot. You should go for something different once in a while. This is also related to the pattern that talks about ``\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/patterns-and-use-cases\#comment-2320}{Carrying Capacity}''. There is always some dimension on which you can make progress --- it just might not be the same dimension you've recently over-harvested! \section{ Stuck at the level of weak ties } «There is a certain irony here: we are studying ``peeragogy'', and yet many respondents did not feel they were really getting to know one another ``as peers''. Several remarked that they learned less from other individual participants, and more from ``the collective''. Those who did have a ``team'', or who knew one another from previous experiences, felt more peer-like in those relationships.» ---\url{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/organizing-a-learning-context} In fact, ``weak ties'' are often deemed a strength: see for example \href{http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/thinking-about-kids/201005/facebook-and-the-strength-weak-ties}{this article} in Psychology Today, which says \begin{quotation} \emph{{[}S{]}trong and weak ties tend to serve different functions in our lives. When we need a big favor or social or instrumental support, we ask our friends. We call them when we need to move a washing machine. But if we need information that we don't have, the people to ask are our weak ties. They have more diverse knowledge and more diverse ties than our close friends do. We ask them when we want to know who to hire to install our washing machine.} \end{quotation} The quote suggests that there is a certain trade-off between use of weak ties and use of strong ties. The anti-pattern in question then is less to do with whether we are forming weak ties or strong ties, and more to do with whether we are being honest with ourselves and with each other about the nature of the ties we are forming --- and their potential uses. We can be ``peers'' in either a weak or a strong sense. The question to ask is whether our needs match our expectations! In the peeragogy context, this has to do with how we interact. One of the participants in this project wrote: \emph{I am learning about peeragogy, but I think I'm failing {[}to be{]} a good peeragog. I remember that Howard {[}once{]} told us that the most important thing is that you should be responsible not only for your own learning but for your peers' learning. {[}\ldots{}{]} So the question is, are we learning from others by ourselves or are we {[}\ldots{}{]} helping others to learn?} If we are ``only'' co-consumers of information (which happens to ``produced'' live, by some of the participants), then this seems like a classic example of a weak tie. We are part of the same ``audience'' --- or anyway, in the same ``theater'' (even if separated from each other by continuous ``4th walls''). On the other hand, actively engaging with other people (whether with ``my'' learning, with ``their'' learning, or with the co-production of knowledge) seems to be the foundation for strong ties. In this case our aims (or needs) are more instrumental, and less informational. People who do not put in the time will remain stuck at the level of ``weak ties'', and will not be able to draw on the benefits that ``strong ties'' offer. \chapter[\textbf{Use cases}]{ Use Cases } (Pending: We can also begin to generate a set of tags to use for categorizing use cases, patterns, etc. ---) \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Collaborate} with a Group \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Create \textbf{Community} \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Curate} Information (select content, contextualize, and share it) \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Research} \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Publish} Information \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Create \textbf{Learning Activites} \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Make} Something \end{itemize} Use cases we've come up with so far: \section{ From peer production to peer learning } \textbf{Main Actor} Julian, an enthusiastic convert to the power of peer-learning \textbf{Main success scenario} \begin{enumerate} \item Reflecting on the success of \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/patterns-and-use-cases\#comment-1749}{Strategy as Learning}, Julian notes that other housing associations might benefit from this process. He also notes that as most housing association boards are made up of volunteers like himself, there is a very wide variation in background, knowledge and skills, and therefore not only a need for low cost (free) learning opportunities, but a range of skills available to enable them. \item Julian sets up a peer learning resource on the web, drawing on the experiences in implementing \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/patterns-and-use-cases\#comment-1749}{Strategy as Learning}, and promotes it through industry-specific web forums. He draws attention from an online journalist writing in the housing field who writes a positive article, and as a result a growing number of collaborators come forward. \item Over a period of a year or so, the core team of active users collaborate to create standards and exemplars in relation to different aspects of housing association governance that become a de facto standard in the sector. \end{enumerate} \textbf{Thoughts} \begin{enumerate} \item Obviously a very specific use case that could easily be generalised \item Possible patterns to extract? Seeding Peer Communities, Emergent Standards, Emergent Assessment ??? \end{enumerate} \section{ C'est la vie } \textbf{Main Actors}: Pierre and Marie - recently married. \textbf{Main Success Scenario}: 1. They furnished off an apartment from a Sears \& Roebuck sale. Their coolerator was crammed with TV dinners and ginger ale. (She couldn't cook.) 2. But when Pierre found work, the little money coming in worked out well. They got a hi-fi phono, and boy, did they let it blast --- Seven hundred little EPs, all rock, rhythm and jazz. 3. When the sun went down, the rapid tempo of the music sort of fell (for various reasons). 4. They bought a souped up Mercedes --- a cherry red '53 --- and drove it down to New Orleans to celebrate their anniversary. 5. ``C'est la vie,'' say the old folks, ``It goes to show you never can tell!'' (Apres Chuck Berry.) \textbf{Thoughts} I tried to use the familiar song to suggest that pæragogy works in personal relationships, too. Compare the above story with this quote from Leopold von Sacher-Massoch\ldots{}: \emph{That woman, as nature has created her and as man is at present educating her, is his enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but \emph{never his companion}. This she can become only when she has the same rights as he, and is his equal in education and work.} I don't know if Sacher-Massoch is particularly reliable as a feminist. But it \emph{is} interesting to look at ``companionship'' (along with membership in the same age cohort) as a criterion for a peer-like and working relationship in the story. It's unclear as to whether Pierre \& Marie have ``equal'' roles (he found work, but it's not in any way implied that she was working\ldots{} so how did she spend her time? Etc.). \section{ Distributed Project Management } \textbf{Primary Actor}: Kim, a Ph. D. student in Geography. 1. Kim has 5 different people on her supervision team: some in her field, others from geology. They all have somewhat different ideas about what she should be doing with her thesis work. None of them are co-located. This situation can be quite frustrating. 2. Kim decides to go spend a few weeks working in close proximity to the one member of the team who she has the most rapport with. This will also give her a chance to be in touch with other students in her field. 3. In the mean time, she establishes contact with yet another researcher whose work is quite closely related to hers. Although he does not have any formal responsibilities or ties to her project, they are already colleagues in an academic sense, and they have more congruent views on what her project is about. After she visits her favorite supervisor, she may plan to spend a month or so visiting this other researcher in his home country. (Note: it could be Joe instead of Kim - I think this sort of networking to create an informal supervision team happens fairly frequently for postgrad students in the UK system. Certainly there are other examples of distributed project management - e.g. W3C working groups come to mind.) \section{ Improved adaptivity } \textbf{Main Actor}: Madeleine, a student who is trying to learn real analysis. \textbf{Main success scenario}: 1. Madeleine has been using a peer-learning website for mathematics for a while now. When she gets stuck, she asks for help in context, and her request is brought to the attention of the appropriate community member, who improves the pedagogic quality of the material. This help enables her to solve math problems very effectively. 2. Now, however, the system's software is being updated. Instead of being solely a ``Web 2.0'' system for communicating about the subject, the system can keep track of new concepts that Madeleine is using in the problems she solves and the questions she asks. It can suggest heuristics that have been used by other students solving similar problems. (It knows about these things through a combination of textual analysis and ``tagging'' of text by Madeleine and other users, e.g. Natalie, who sometimes gives comments on problems that Madeleine solves.) 3. As the system grows and improves (through efforts of students and mentors), learning mathematics becomes increasingly easy. The material has been gone over by 100s of students and learning pathways are optimized. Madeleine sometimes can get a quick tutoring gig helping out another younger student, and make some money, but mostly she's thinking about what other subjects she will need to add to her portfolio in order to become an architect\ldots{} by the time she's 23! \section{ More efficient research funding } \textbf{Primary actor}: Javier, who works on Cultural Heritage, Technology Enhanced Learning, the Information Society and Media for the European Commission. 1. Javier is interested in research topics like ``data analytics'' and ``emerging topics in ICT'' --- things that will influence learning technology in the next 5 years. He is also concerned about how best to fund work on new learning and teaching environments. 2. He wonders what the barriers and incentives are in this niche. For example, why does research work frequently not have the broad-scale societal impact that the EC hopes it might? 3. Javier is invited to a pæragogy event, in which some unexpected experts on ``broad scale impact'' help him understand that intensive funding for research is often not going to have the desired effect, since, for various reasons, even well-funded research projects are frequently not well connected to actual practice. 4. He starts to build pæragogy into funding calls: smaller pots of money going to projects that connect with what people actually do, working with partners like the Wikimedia Foundation and the Free Software Foundation to multiply effort by involving volunteers. It's time for him to take a well-earned vacation. \section{ A journalist in the Whispering Gallery } \textbf{Main Actor}: Jorge Luis is a journalist for a London business paper. \textbf{Main scenario}: 1. Jorge Luis writes on a daily and even hourly basis about the eurozone crisis. He uses social dashboards and curating tools and produces lots of curated stories about the causes of the problems, the stupidity of the continental europeans and how it will all end soon in complete and utter disaster. His sources are other journalists, well-known economists and famous bloggers. 2. On his way to the newsroom he usually passes St Pauls cathedral, where Occupy London people protest. He thinks they rather look like losers, except for one very interesting young lady. She tells him where he can find the center of the universe: at the Whispering Gallery of the cathedral. He thinks she is nuts, but also very beautiful and interesting, so he walks the 259 steps from ground level to the Gallery. Once he gets there, he realizes that the girl was right. It IS the center of the universe. There are murmurs to be heard there - it seems they come from everywhere. He hears about guilds and the craftsmen who built the cathedral. He learns about how proud they were and how they formed communities of practice, educating the uninitiated, teaching each other to create. 3. He returns to ground level. The girl is gone, but yet he feels happy. He realizes he can do more then repackage the social media streams, that there is more than Twitter-the-new broadcast medium. He starts a new journey: finding a guild, a community of practice, but restyled in a 21st century fashion. It will be more open, more connected to others then the old guilds. He will still use a social dashboard and curaring tools, but also he uses wikis, and synchronous communication. And most importantly, he starts building, together with others. For instance, together with the people formerly known as his readers. They will co-create the analysis, the search for solutions and sense-making, rather than helplessly listening to ``experts'', passively consuming the knowledge and information. Instead, they'll start building their own destiny as a community, and the newsroom will be part of the platform. \section{ Living the OER dream } \textbf{Primary Actor}: Charlie, who does tutoring and educational consulting, and who has been doing research on paragogy. Main success scenario: \begin{enumerate} \item Charlie usually tutors one-on-one but has been putting work into understanding and exploring peer learning and peer production, putting it into practice on P2PU and in courses and projects with Howard Rheingold. \item X-Y-Z peer learning theory (paragogy?) helps him design learning activities that work well for groups of students \item He deploys the new model on paragogy.net as an educational startup, and realizes the ``OER dream''! \end{enumerate} \section{ Making our own tools } \textbf{Main Actor}: Howard runs \href{http://www.rheingold.com/university/}{Rheingold University} and teaches courses at UCB and Stanford. 1. Howard created the peeragogy project, as a place to experiment and learn: ``I want to experiment as much as possible with peeragogy, with the group of contributors here, with the co-learners in Rheingold U, and with other groups in the future. I want to personally use the tools we're building. I know something about how to do it, and can make substantial contributions. But I also am learning a lot about how to do it from others, and expect that to continue.'' 2. Although ``bringing a volunteer project to completion {[}\ldots{}{]} isn't a guaranteed slam-dunk'', Howard learns by doing: ``If I had it to do over again, I would have thought out the work flow and delineated it before we started talking about how to do the project.'' 3. With both frequent, and other less frequent, but thoughtful, contributors, the project continues to develop, and will indeed complete somehow (even if no one knew quite what to expect in advance). Howard and other contributors have learned a lot in the process - and this will be useful both for the duration of the peeragogy project, and in future projects. As hoped! \section{ Paragogy } \textbf{Main Actor}: Joe, who is working on a concept map about peer learning. 1. Joe is working on a concept map about peer learning, and notices that a lot of the patterns that apply to learning would apply to other social activities. In the end, what's so special about ``learning'' or ``education''? Why should it be separated out from the rest of what humans do. 2. Certainly education itself has an economic facet to it: for some people, it's a job, and for many, it means future employability. 3. Can we really discuss methods for ``doing peeragogy'' without also rethinking the economic and productive aspects of education? Joe decides that ``paragogy'' should at least be introduced into the ``peeragogy'' concept map. \textbf{Footnote} This quote from Askins and Pain, ``Contact zones: participation, materiality, and the messiness of interaction'' (2011) in the conclusion of our essay ``\href{http://peeragogy.org/to-peeragogy/}{From Peer Learning to `Peeragogy'}'' suggests a ``paragogical'' approach to research within a ``contact zone''. That is, paragogy is research that happens ``alongside''. \section{ Peer Learning on the Technical Edge } \textbf{Main Actor}: Jess, a hacker and engineer who develops new libraries and programs quickly and on the bleeding edge of new technologies. 1. Jess develops something new and totally cool and drops the source code in GitHub. These tools are developed rapidly and are a much lighter ``learning lift'' than learning say an entirely new programming language. 2. She creates documentation for her new library and puts it up on a web site for other developers to read. 3. She is trying to find a better way for other developers to learn how to use the new tools and libraries she creates and starts thinking about peer learning. 5. How can she use what tools and processes or methods that are already out there to engage other developers to learn from and with each other digitally. 6. Jess has no background in learning theory and is not in the educational field. \section{ Water flow in a pipe } \textbf{Primary Actor}: A student, Madeleine, who is trying to learn multivariable calculus. \textbf{Main Success Scenario}: i. Madeleine is enrolled in an advanced calculus course at university. She learns about PlanetMath from her instructor who recommends it as a place for extra practice with homework problems. Madeleine creates an account, fills in basic profile information, and starts solving problems that the system supplies based on the information she supplied in her profile. ii. The problems that the system supplies are automatically linked to reference resources in PlanetMath's encyclopaedia. This expository material gives Madeleine easy access to the relevant mathematical concepts, examples, and hints needed for solving the increasingly difficult practice problems. However, she eventually runs into a problem where neither the automatically supplied information, nor her current knowledge of the subject, is sufficient. She's completely stuck on a problem having to do with water flow in a pipe! Madeleine attaches a help request to the problem: ``I understand that I have to use the two variables $x$ and $y$ to solve for water flow, but I don't understand what the boundary limits of the equations would be: do I have to convert it to polar coordinates?'' iii. This request is noticed by Natalie, a mathematics graduate student who regularly looks at the feed showing ``recent requests for help with advanced calculus.'' She sees that the reference resources linked to Madeleine's problem are probably not sufficient, and that Madeleine's idea about using polar coordinates would work. Natalie makes some changes to the encyclopaedia indicating that converting to converting to polar coordinates can be necessary in pipe flow problems, and sketches an example. Natalie then checks that this information links to Madeleine's problem correctly, and alerts Madeleine to the changes. With this new information, Madeleine is not only able to solve her problem, but can proceed with confidence: she had the right idea after all! \section{ Pæragogy helps solve complex problems } \textbf{Primary Actor}: \emph{Neo, who is a hacker by night, and an office worker by day (and who reads Baudrillard in his spare time).} \textbf{Main Success Scenario}: \begin{enumerate} \item Neo lives in New York City, and works as a programmer in an office near Wall Street. His day-job involves finding patterns in market data (see this TED talk: \url{http://www.ted.com/talks/kevin\_slavin\_how\_algorithms\_shape\_our\_world.html}). \item He has been walking past \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuccotti\_Park}{Zucotti Park} on his way home and more or less he finds this protest stuff annoying (he has other stuff on his mind). But one of these evenings, one of the protestors catches his attention (she's dressed rather strikingly\ldots{}). They talk a bit, and he comes away thinking about what she said: ``\href{http://www.nycga.net/files/2011/11/DeclarationFlowchart\_v2\_large.jpg}{All our grievances are interconnected.}'' What if all the solutions are interconnected too? \item Night time: Neo becomes increasingly obsessed with this idea. He's pulling down lots of web pages from OWS activists, from companies, from government websites --- again, looking for patterns. What would it take for OWS folks to solve the problems they worry so much about? \item He eventually stumbles across the idea of pæragogy and it works like the ``red pill'': it's possible to solve the problems but only by working together. It would be hard to engineer a social media platform that will actually help with this (OWS folks mostly use Tumblr and aren't necessarily all that technologically minded). But he starts working on a \href{http://campus.ftacademy.org/wiki/index.php/Free\_Technology\_Guild}{tool} that's geared towards learning and sharing skills, while working on real projects. At first, it's just hackers who are using the tool, but over time they adapt it for popular use. Then things start to get interesting\ldots{} \end{enumerate} \section{ Starting a Company } \textbf{Introduction} I think that Peeragogy has flavors --- learning for learning sake for personal ends in a progression toward learning about the world to take action as a group. The latter gets heavily into Action Research (Stringer, 2007), which I love and work heavily in. It is research in cycles, or loops with feedback to try something, measure it, see how it worked with the real world, then plan the next question and set of actions. In each cycle, the group is Learning. I look with that lens at company start-ups as a perpectual action research cycle. I heard Eric Reis at SXSW talk about the Lean Startup in this mode, including this direction in how he even wrote the book. Hypothesis, experiment, feedback, learn, pivot, next hypothesis\ldots{} Is the group in this peeragogy learning set knowledge or creating new knowledge? Or through new knowledge making a change in the world? A great spectrum of alternatives! Here, my scenario about a company I was on the board on early on: \textbf{Main actors} \emph{Cycle 1}: Nick, an MBA student, plus a Computer Science PhD, John, at a major university. John had created a unique technology for identifying video clips and had no idea what to do with it. Nick was an ex-engineer learning about how to launch new businesses. \emph{Cycle 2}: Additional ``learners'' and co-teachers as board members, each adding new learning elements and expertise. Cycle 3+: New learners as investors and clients. \textbf{Main success scenario} \begin{enumerate} \item Nick and John used a new business plan competition as the catalyst and structure to experiment with what ideas might be possible to grow this idea. They named it Findable (not the real name; the company did launch with some interesting success, but we'll come to that later). They brought three other MBAs into the initial group, and within the confines of a business plan structure, researched the stereotypical elements of a business plan --- addressable market, competition, expense and revenue projections, etc. They knew nothing of the area, and each person did independent research work to provide some primary (interview-based) and secondary (existing text) information about their hypothesis of what the technology could do for what audience in what environment. They worked hard up until the competition deadline, and won the business plan competition, gaining \$15,000 in the process plus the attention of some VCs on the judging panel. Each person had learned a lot about the technology, the creative process of writing the business plan, the rituals involved of asking for money, and the flaws in their own plan that they found on its creation. They used fairly traditional technology tools: email, shared Word and Excel files, telephone, search, and a shared file system to store everything that they worked on. \item Nick and Fred wanted to move forward with this project. Their next hypothesis was that they could launch this in a specific market. They first came to the idea, from the learning from the business plan and lots of feedback from the VCs, that they could start with the advertising market, as they could now identify and ``tag'' any ad that they could find on cable or the internet. They got seed capital from three interested parties, who become part of their Action Research learning team. They realized to launch that they needed more voices on their learning team, so they added their first 3 employees to design and sell the product. They also added an advisory board, including yours truly, assuming they would be working in the advertising market. Technologies? Traditional, though they now included all sorts of tech development resources. New information into the mix? They had not put together great resources to optimize their time learning, and spent a lot of energy keeping up with things, information, and opportunities. Learning? Some initial users loved their product, but the market size was smaller than they thought\ldots{}plus was very entrenched. The companies did not see a real pain point that was being solved. \item Cycle 3 --- what the heck do Nick and Fred do with this? This became the true learning phase. Different companies and advisors saw different needs for their intriguing product set. They spent 4 years (!!!) getting pulled this way and that, using the VC money and needing more. (This is VERY much the learning path I see in many small tech companies.) Technologies? Same stuff. Learning team? Ebbed and flowed with new opportunities and people's patience. My expertise was in the ``old'' model, so peaceably left the team (but got options!). \item Cycle 4+ --- a major public company ``found'' them through their learning cycles, and found that they solved a pain point. They invested a sizeable sum into a chunk of the company, and launched their product into that solution. This opened a whole other set of learning doors. \item Final cycle --- Happily, I cashed out my options. Two major media technology companies ended up buying two areas of key technologies in 2011, much to my own pocketbook's happiness. Nick and Fred had moved on earlier, turning the company learning over to specialized managers. I need to see what Nick is up to next\ldots{}. \end{enumerate} \textbf{Thoughts} \begin{enumerate} \item Many great patterns were tucked into many cycles of this use case, often unspoken assumptions in a new business start-up, including environment scanning, codifying specialist knowledge, themes, modeling, etc. Consensus building --- an interesting element. \item For me, the additional elements are (a) the scaffolding of the ``norms'' of cycles (e.g., business plan creation, a competition, a launch of a product) help provide ``norming'' frameworks that can help groups achieve as well as limit their looking at the structural norms as anything but ``required'' and (b) the lens of Action Research Cycles from my own POV. Are we setting a hard limit of providing a hypothesis in our co-creation, so we know when we are ``done'' and what we have to study? Then once that chunk is done (and CELEBRATED) that another hypothesis can be investigated, explored, proven, and co-created? I believe that having pre-structured points of learning achievement, reflection, and celebration can really help in moving forward. \item My own brain is rethinking these issues around content creation after hearing Eric Reis speak on how he tested his content creation for his NYT-Best Selling book. \item How are we testing this Handbook, other than living through it? :) \end{enumerate} \section{ Steal This Book } \begin{quotation} \emph{Obviously such a project as Steal This Book could not have been carried out alone. Izak Haber shared the vision from the beginning. He did months of valuable research and contributed many of the survival techniques. Carole Ramer and Gus Reichbach of the New York Law Commune guided the book through its many stages. Anna Kaufman Moon did almost all the photographs. The cartoonists who have made contributions include Ski Williamson and Gilbert Sheldon. Tom Forcade, of the UPS, patiently did the editing. Bert Cohen of Concert Hall did the book's graphic design. Amber and John Wilcox set the type. Anita Hoffman and Lynn Borman helped me rewrite a number of sections. There are others who participated in the testing of many of the techniques demonstrated in the following pages and for obvious reasons have to remain anonymous. There were perhaps over 50 brothers and sisters who played particularly vital roles in the grand conspiracy. Some of the many others are listed on the following page. We hope to keep the information up to date. If you have comments, law suits, suggestions or death threats, please send them to: Dear Abbie P.0. Box 213, Cooper Station, New York, NY 10003. Many of the tips might not work in your area, some might be obsolete by the time you get to try them out, and many addresses and phone numbers might be changed. If the reader becomes a participating researcher then we will have achieved our purpose.} --- Abbie Hoffman \end{quotation} \section{ Strategy as learning } \textbf{Main actors} The non-executive (Jim, Pamela, Julian) and executive (Clare, Malcolm, Colin \& Jenny) directors of a housing association (a not-for-profit organisation building and letting ``social'' housing for families in housing need) \textbf{Main success scenario} \begin{enumerate} \item The board of the housing association need to set a strategy that takes account of significant changes in legislation, the UK {[}welfare{]} benefits system and the availability of long term construction loans. \item Julian, eager to make use of his new-found peeragogical insights suggests an approach where individuals research specific factors and the team work together to draw out themes and strategic options. As a start he proposes that each board member researches an area of specific knowledge or interest. \item Jim, the Chairman, identifies questions he wants to ask the Chairs of other Housing Associations. Pamela (a lawyer) agrees to do an analysis of the relevant legislation. Clare, the CEO, plans out a series of meetings with the local councils in the boroughs of interest to understand their reactions to the changes from central government. Jenny, the operations director, starts modelling the impact on occupancy from new benefits rules. Colin, the development director, re-purposes existing work on options for development sites to reflect different housing mixes on each site. Malcolm, the finance director, prepares a briefing on the new treasury landscape and the changing positions of major lenders. \item Each member of the board documents their research in a private wiki. Julian facilitates some synchronous and asynchronous discussion to draw out themes in each area and map across the areas of interest. Malcolm, the FD, adapts his financial models to take differet options as parameters. \item Clare refines the themes into a set of strategic options for the association, with associated financial modelling provided by Malcolm. \item Individual board members explore the options asynchronously before convening for an all-day meeting to confirm the strategy. \end{enumerate} \textbf{Thoughts} \begin{enumerate} \item This may be a little close to the ``peer production'' end of peeragogy, but on the other hand, where (if anywhere) do we draw the line? \item This probably needs to be made a little more abstract to be a useful use case, and in doing so I suspect will start to overlap with \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/patterns-and-use-cases\#comment-1509}{Pæragogy helps solve complex problems} \item It looks to me as if there may be some candidate patterns buried in this use case, e.g. Environment Scanning, Codifying Specialist Knowledge, Extracting Themes, Modelling Outcomes, Consensus Building \end{enumerate} \section{ We are the 1 percent } \textbf{Main Actor}: Trinity, the daughter of a Texas oil magnate. \textbf{Soundtack}: \url{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWsX9ggfL2Q} 1. Trinity has spent the last year traveling around the world to join in various \#Occupy protests. Her aim is to get people in the movement thinking about how they can empower themselves. 2. It's tricky though, because as much as she knows she has an impact on individuals, she still sees a lot of problems in the world, which, given her manic-depressive tendencies, she tends to find very disturbing. 3. She reaches out to other folks who are privileged in one way or another --- and a bunch of ``normal folks'' --- trying not only to bring about political change, but trying to establish a degree of personal friendship and camaraderie, and a feeling of ``belonging in the world''. For her, this is a constant struggle. She finds that working with other people on concrete tasks keeps her from spiraling into a state of gloom. In the mean time, she's also building a tremendous amount of knowledge about the way social movements and political processes work. \textbf{Footnote}: ``The Knife is now recording a new album to be released in 2012. Lately we have read a lot about the ongoing discrimination of Romani people in Europe which is totally unacceptable. The forced evictions must stop and adequate alternative housing must be arranged. Now!'' --- \url{http://theknife.net/take-action-for-the-housing-rights-of-roma-in-rome} \section{Aspiring blogger wants not to starve} \textbf{Main Actor: Simone } Simone is a young media department graduate, who followed the adventures of the journalist Jorge Luis (see previous post). Jorge Luis was transforming the newspaper operation into a kind of collective learning project, turning the newsroom into a platform for discussion and learning, and inciting the developers to provide an API for external coders. Simone wrote a paper about all this in her last year at the media department.\textbf{ She also runs a blog about tools which empower people to participate in politics (local, nation-wide and international). } \textbf{Main success scenario} 1) Simone loves her blog. She believes verticals and specialization are the future in blogging. However, she needs money to live, and to pay back the debts she made to finance her studies. Her media department was moderately interesting, but nobody ever thought of organizing a course ``entrepreneurial blogging/journalism''. 2) Posting every day about collaborative online tools such as wikis, forums, blogs, mindmaps, synchronous sessions, social bookmarks, visualization tools, Simone decides to reach out and look online for others who are experiencing the same challenges. 3) As she encounters various other people, they start curating stuff about blogging business models and best practices. They find lots of useful stuff for free at Robin Good's website, and they manage to get access to online resources at a strange group which seems to specialize in ``mind amplifying tools'' and ``literacies of cooperation''. They also discover that ``entrepreneurial journalism'' is taught at various colleges, and invariably the professors and most of the students there indulge in blogging and publishing about their insights and experiments. All that material is being discussed on the collaborative platform Simone built. 4) Simone uses the discussions to blog about her experience. After all, issues about financing media who empower people in order to broaden and deepen the democracy is something which is rather on topic for her own blogging practice. Also, because of her reaching out, her contacts increased considerably. She works together with someone to share a virtual co-working space, and people start noticing her. Some ask her for customized expert advice about collaborative tools and collaboration methodologies. The city council expresses some vague interest and considers hiring her as a consultant. 5) Even though she gets several gigs, Simone realizes it's not easy to earn a living as a blogger. But it seems to open other doors\ldots{} however, she continues her investigation about business models for collaborative media. As yet we don't know whether Simone's blog will be profitable in itself, but we do see a network around her projects, exchanging insights but also valuable business information and opening more doors. \textbf{Thoughts } I had the opportunity to give some seminars at media departments here in Belgium. In my experience, the students were not familiar with curation practices or infotention strategies. They also lack courses in entrepreneurial journalism. In other words, they're still educated for the big media companies, but they're not prepared to start the next TechCrunch or Huffington Post. Often the students asked me, after the seminar, ``how can we learn all this? they won't teach us these things here''. I think there is a need for P2P learning about not only curation, infotention, social dashboards, communities and governance of common pool recourses, but also about publishing strategies, social media workflows and business models. \part{~~~~Technologies, Services, and Platforms } \textbf{It is tempting to bring a list of technologies out as a glorious cookbook. }We need a 1/2 cup of group writing tools, 2 tsp. of social network elements, a thick slice of social bookmarking, and some sugar, then put it in the oven for 1 hour for 350 degrees. We have created a broad features/functions list for Handbook readers to reflect upon and consider. The joy of this list is that you can consider alternatives for the way you communicate and work while you are planning the project, or can add in new elements to solve communications gaps or create new tools. However, too many tools spoil the broth. In the writing of this Handbook, we found that out firsthand. We spent a lot of marvelous energy exploring different tools to collaborate, curate information, do research, tag resources, and adjudicate among all of our points of view. In looking at groups working with the various MOOCs, as another example, different groups of students often camp in different social media technologies to work. In large courses, students often have to be pushed into various social media tools to ``co-create'' with great protest and lots of inertia. And finally, co-learning groups often come from very different backgrounds, ages, and stages of life, with very different tools embedded in their current lives. Do we have time for three more tools in our busy days? Do more tools help or interfere in our work? In this section, we'll share with you a few issues: \begin{itemize} \item What technologies are most useful in peer learning? What do we use them for? What features or functions help our co-learning process? \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item How do we decide (a) as a group and (b) for the group on what tools we can use? Do we decide upfront, or grow as we go? \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item How do we coach and scaffold each other on use of tools? \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item How much do the tool choices impact the actual outcome of our learning project? \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item What are the different roles that co-learners can take in co-teaching and co-coaching the technology affordances/assumptions in the project to make others' lives easier? \end{itemize} \textgreater{}\textgreater{} \textbf{Continue: Discussion of Features and Considerations} We will begin below with a discussions of ``features'' and initial considerations, and then move to a broader ``Choose Your Own Adventure''-style matrix of features leading to a wide variety of collaboration-based technology tools online. \textbf{Technologies and Features} As we will share in the extensive list below, there are abundant tools now available --- both for free and for pay --- to bring great features to our co-learning endeavors. It is tempting to grab a group of fancy tools and bring the group into a fairly complex tool environment to find the perfect combination of resources. The challenge: as Adult Learners, we seek both comfort and context in our lives (Schein, \href{\#schein97}{1997}, \href{\#schein04}{2004}). In choosing tools as Brands and technologies, we can ignore the features themselves and what we need as parts of the puzzle for learning. We also can have anxiety about our self-beliefs around computers and technology, which in turn can limit our abilities \href{\#compeau}{(Compeau \& Higgins, 1995)}. Before we get to Brands and choices, it helps to ask a few questions about the learning goals and environments: \begin{itemize} \item What do we need as features, and at what stage of the learning process? \item What are we already comfortable with, individually and as a group? \item Do we want to stay with comfortable existing tools, or do we want to stretch, or both? \item What types of learners do we have in this group? Technologically advanced? Comfortable with basics? \item Do we want to invest the time to bring the whole group up to speed on tools? Do all the group members agree on this? Do we want to risk alienating members by making them invest time in new resources? \item We know that our use will migrate and adapt. Do we want to plan for adaptation? Observe it? Learn from it? Make that change intentional as we go? \end{itemize} Researchers over the years have heavily examined these questions of human, technology, and task fit in many arenas. \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-Computer\_Interaction}{Human-Computer Interaction} researchers have looked at ``fit'' and ``adaptive behavior,'' as well as how the tools can affect how the problem is presented in the work \href{\#teeni}{(Te'eni, 2006)}. Creativity support tools \href{\#shneiderman}{(Shneiderman, 2002)} have a whole line of design research, as has the field of \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-supported\_cooperative\_work}{Computer-Supported Collaborative Work Systems (CSCW)}. For co-learners and designers interested in the abundance in this space, we've added some additional links below.We here will make this a bit easier. For your co-learning environment, you may want to do one or two exercises in your decision planning: \begin{itemize} \item What \textbf{features do you need}? Do you need collaboration? Graphic models? Places to work at the same time (synchronous)? Between meetings (asynchroous)? \item What are the group members \textbf{already using} as their personal learning platforms? It also makes sense to do an inventory about what the group already has as their learning platforms. I'm doing that with another learning group right now. People are much more comfortable --- as we also have found in our co-creation of this Handbook --- creating and co-learning in tools with which they already are comfortable. Members can be co-teachers to each other --- as we have have --- in new platforms. \item What \textbf{type of tools}, based on the features that we need, shall we start out with? \href{\#resnick}{Resnick at al. (2005)}looked at technology tools having \begin{itemize} \item Low thresholds (easy to get people started) \item Wide walls (able to bring in lots of different situations and uses) and \item High ceilings (able to do complex tasks as the users and uses adapt and grow). \end{itemize} \item What are important features needed for co-creation and \textbf{working together}? In other pages above, we talk abundantly about roles and co-learning challenges. These issues also are not new; \href{\#dourish}{Dourish \& Bellottii back in 1992} for example, shared long-standing issues in computer-supportive collaborative work online about how we are aware of the information from others, passive vs. active generation of information about collaborators, etc. These challenges used to be ``solved'' by software designers in individual tools. Now that tools are open, abundant, and diverse, groups embrace these same challenges when choosing between online resources for co-learning. \end{itemize} Which of these will be important to your group work? Keep in mind --- your needs for tools, plus how the group uses them, \emph{\textbf{will change as the co-learning project moves along}}. Are you willing to change tools during the project as your needs and users change, or do you want to plan on tools that are great in all these dimensions at the start? \textbf{Useful/Uses and Features of Technology Tools} From here, we will help you think about what might be possible, linking to features and solution ideas. We start with ways to ask the key questions: What do you want to do and why? We will start with features organized around several different axes: \begin{itemize} \item \href{\#time-place}{Time/Place} \item \href{\#stages}{Stages of Activities and Tasks} \item \href{\#skill}{Skill Building/Bloom's Taxonomy} \item \href{\#use}{Use Cases}, and \item \href{\#functions}{Learning Functions}. \end{itemize} Each will link to pages that will prompt you with features, functionality, and technology tool ideas. \textbf{Time/Place} We can further break down tools into whether they create or distribute, or whether we can work simultaneously (synchronous) or at our own times (ascynchronous). To make elements of time and place more visual, \href{\#baeker}{Baecker (1995)} created a CSCW Matrix, bringing together time and place functions and needs: \textbf{\textbf{Same Time (Synchronous)}} \textbf{Different Time (Ascynronous)} \textbf{Same Place (Co-located)} \textbf{Face-to Face}: Display-focused (e.g., Smartboards) \textbf{Continuous Task}: Groupware, project management \textbf{Different Place (Remote)} \textbf{Remote Interaction}: Videoconference, IM, Chat, Virtual Worlds \textbf{Communication \& Coordination}: Email, bulletin boards, Wikis, blog, workflow tools Some tools are synchronous, such as Google+ Hangouts, Blackboard Collaborate, and Adobe Connect, while others let us work asynchronously, such as wikis, forums, and Google Docs. We seem to be considering here mostly tools good for group work, but not for solo, while many others are much easier solo or in smaller groups. \textbf{Stages of Activities and Tasks} \href{\#shneiderman}{Dan Shneiderman} (2002) has simplified the abundant models in this area (e.g., Couger and Cave) with a clear model of 4 general activities and 8 tasks in creation for individuals, which we can lean on as another framework for co-creation in co-learning. \subsection{\textbf{Activities}} \textbf{Tasks} \subsection{Collect} \begin{itemize} \item Searching \item Visualizing \end{itemize} \subsection{Relate} \begin{itemize} \item Consulting Others \end{itemize} \subsection{Create} \begin{itemize} \item Thinking (Free Association) \item Exploring \item Composing \item Reviewing \end{itemize} \subsection{Distribute} \begin{itemize} \item Disseminating \end{itemize} Tools and functions won't be clear cut between areas. For example, some tools are more focused on being generative, or for creating content. Wikis, Etherpad, Google docs, and others usually have a commenting/talk page element, yet generating content is the primary goal and discursive/consultative functions are in service of that. Some tools are discursive, or focused on working together for the creative element of ``relating'' above --- Blackboard Collaborate, the social media class room forums, etc. \textbf{Skill Building (Cognitive, a la Bloom's Taxonomy, see below)} Given that we are exploring learning, we can look to Bloom's Taxonomy (revised, \href{\#anderson}{Anderson \& Krathwohl, 2001}) for guidance as to how we can look at knowledge support. Starting at the bottom, we have: \begin{itemize} \item Remembering, as a base; \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Understanding, \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Applying, \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Analyzing, \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Evaluating, and then, at the top, \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Creating. \end{itemize} We could put ``search'' in the Remembering category above. Others {[}need to re-find and cite{]} contest that Search, done well, embraces most of the Bloom's elements above. Samantha Penney has created a Bloom's Digital Taxonomy Pyramid of tools for learning (cc 3.0 --- \url{http://www.usi.edu/distance/bdt.htm)}. \begin{figure} \begin{center} \includegraphics[width=3in]{./pictures/blooms.jpg} \end{center} \end{figure} \textbf{ Use Cases (I want to\ldots{}.)} Technologies can be outlined according to the need they serve or use case they fulfill. Examples: If we need to `curate', Pearl Trees is an option. To `publish' or `create', we can look to a wiki or wordpress. Other choices might be great in order to `collaborate', etc. One challenge is that tools are not that simple. As we look more closely at the technologies today, we need to reach more broadly to add multiple tags to them. For example Twitter can be used for ``Convening a group,'' for ``micro-blogging,'' for ``research,'' etc. \begin{itemize} \item Collaborate with a Group \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Create Community \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Curate Information (select content, contextualize, and share it) \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Research \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Publish Information \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Create Learning Activities \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Make Something \end{itemize} These plans get more complex, as you are making a group of decisions about tool functionality in order to choose what combination works for use cases. It may be most useful to use a concept map (a tech tool) to think about the needs and combinations that you would bring together to achieve each Use Case or Learning Module. \textbf{Technology Features/Functions}We have not made this easy! There are lots of moving elements and options here, none of them right for everything, and some of them fabulous for specific functions and needs. Some have the low thresholds but may not be broad in scope. Some are broad for many uses; others are specific task-oriented tools. That is some of the charm and frustration.Weaving all of the above together, we have brought together a shared taxonomy for us to discuss and think about co-learning technology features and functions. We have connected various technology features with an expanded version of Ben Shneiderman's creativity support tools framework for the linked resource guide. \textbf{\textgreater{}\textgreater{} \href{http://peeragogy.org/technologies/tech-features-functions/}{Link to Technology Features and Functions Grid}}We've created this linked toolset with multiple tags, hopefully making it easier for you to evaluate which tool suits best the necessities of the group.Please consider this a starting point for your own connected exploration. \textbf{} \textbf{References:} \begin{itemize} \item Anderson, L. W., \& Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). \emph{A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives: Complete edition}. New York, NY: Longman. \item \href{http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/ronald\_m\_\_baecker.html}{}Baecker, R., \href{http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/jonathan\_grudin.html}{Grudin}, J., \href{http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/william\_buxton.html}{Buxton}, W., \& \href{http://www.interaction-design.org/references/authors/saul\_greenberg.html}{Greenberg}, \& (eds.) (1995): \emph{Readings in Human-Computer Interaction: Toward the Year 2000.} New York, NY: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers \item Compeau, D.R., \& Higgins, C.A. (1995, June). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. \emph{MIS Quarterly, 19}, (2), 189--211. \item Dourish, P. \& Bellotti, V. (1992). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In \emph{Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work} (CSCW '92). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 107--114. DOI=10.1145/143457.143468 \url{http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/143457.143468} \item Resnick, M, Myers, B, Nakakoji, K, Shneiderman, B, Pausch, R, Selker, T. \& Eisenberg, M (2005). Design principles for tools to support creative thinking. \emph{Institute for Software Research.} Paper 816. \url{http://repository.cmu.edu/isr/816} \item Schein, E. H. (1997). \emph{Organizational learning as cognitive re-definition: Coercive persuasion revisited}. Cambridge, MA: Society for Organizational Learning. \item Schein, E. H. (2004). \emph{Organizational culture and leadership.} San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Shneiderman, B. (2002). Creativity support tools. \emph{Commun. ACM} 45, 10 (October 2002), 116--120. DOI=10.1145/570907.570945 \url{http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/570907.570945} \item Te'eni, D. (2006). Designs that fit: An overview of fit conceptualizations in HCI. In \emph{Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems: Foundations}, edited by P. Zhang and D. Galletta, pp. 205--221, Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. \end{itemize} \textbf{Additional Research for Interested Co-Learners:} \begin{itemize} \item Irene Greif and Sunil Sarin (1987): Data Sharing in Group Work, ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, vol. 5, no. 2, April 1987, pp. 187--211. \item Irene Greif (ed.) (1988): Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: A Book of Readings, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman. \item Irene Greif (1988): Remarks in panel discussion on ``CSCW: What does it mean?'', CSCW `88. Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, September 26--28, 1988, Portland, Oregon, ACM, New York, NY. \item Kamnersgaard, 1988 \item Vessey \& Galletta, 1991 \item Norman, 2001, 2003 \item DeSanctis \& Pool, 2004 \end{itemize} \chapter{ Technology Features and Functions } \textbf{\emph{Weaving all of these frameworks together},} we have brought together a shared taxonomy for us to discuss and think about co-learning technology features and functions. We have connected various technology features with an expanded version of Ben Shneiderman's creativity support tools framework for the linked resource guide.Note: please add tools as posts that follow the following \href{http://peeragogy.org/tool-post-template/\%20?}{template} format.\emph{\textbf{Click the links below}} to take you to samples of each of these features and functions in groups of tools. Please consider this a starting point for your own connected exploration.\textbf{\textgreater{}\textgreater{} \href{http://peeragogy.org/technologies/}{To return to Technology, Services, \& Platforms}} \textbf{Activities} \textbf{Tasks} \textbf{Features/Functions} \subsection{Planning/Designing (a cycle of Learning before the Co-Learning)} \begin{itemize} \item Communicating \item Deciding and Creating Alternatives \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/convening-group/}{Convening a group} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/planning-a-coursestructure/}{Planning a course/structure} \begin{itemize} \item Assembling a syllabus \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Designing a learning activity\textbf{} \end{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/designing-self-assessment/}{Designing self-assessment} (group and individual) \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/setting-goals/}{Setting individual and group goals} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/brainstorming/}{Brainstorming} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/visualizing/}{Visualizing} \end{itemize} \subsection{Collect/Share Inbound} \begin{itemize} \item Searching \item Visualizing \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/search/}{Search} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/social-bookmarking/}{Social Bookmarking} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/taxonomics/}{Creating/Finding Taxonomies} (shared keywords, domain-based keywords) \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/programming-toolsets/}{Programming Toolsets} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/collaborative-reading/}{Collaborative reading} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/collaborative-note-taking/}{Collaborative note-taking} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/curation-tools/}{Curation Tools} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/recording-information-inputs/}{Gathering information} (e.g., capturing audio, video, text) \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/surveys-and-questionnaires/}{Surveys and Questionnaires} \end{itemize} \subsection{Relate} \begin{itemize} \item Consulting Others from the Outside \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/qualitative-research/}{Qualitative research} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/quantitative-research/}{Quantitative research} \end{itemize} \subsection{Communication} \begin{itemize} \item Connecting with Others in the Group \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/planning-and-scheduling/}{Project Planning - Scheduling} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/voice-and-video-conferencing/}{Voice/Video Conferencing Services} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/group-communication/}{Group Email / Forum Messaging Services} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/file-sharing/}{File Sharing Service (Cloud Based)} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/screen-capture/}{Screen Capturing and Screen Casting} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/presentation-and-document-sharing/}{Presentation and Document Sharing} \end{itemize} \subsection{Co-Create} \begin{itemize} \item Thinking (Free Association) \item Exploring \item Composing \item Reviewing \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/learning-management-systems/}{Learning Management Systems} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/document-collaborationediting/}{Document Collaboration} and Editing \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/visualization/}{Visualizing Information}(for analysis and synthesis) \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/concept-maps/}{Concept Maps} \item Data visualization (of ``Big Data'' or larger sets for decision-making \end{itemize} \end{itemize} \subsection{Distribute/Action} \begin{itemize} \item Disseminating \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item Publishing Platforms \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/traditional-publishing/}{Traditional publishing} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/social-media-sharingdistribution/}{Social media/sharing distribution} \end{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/visualization/}{Visualization} (for presentation) \end{itemize} \subsection{Feedback} \begin{itemize} \item \href{http://peeragogy.org/social-listening/}{Social Monitoring/Listening} \end{itemize} \textbf{Editing team: Google Docs Technology Matrix}\textbf{ ---}\url{https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApZ8\_aXL9go8dEUxeThxblhQWmVPbHdHdWpaLWxOWGc\#gid=0} \chapter{ Wiki } \section{Summary:} In the context of P2P-learning, a wiki platform can be a useful and powerful collaboration tool. This section will help you understand what a wiki is and what it is not, why you should use it, how to choose a wiki engine and finally how you could use it in a P2P context. Some examples of P2P-learning projects run on wikis will help you see the potential of the tool. \section{What is a wiki ?} For \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward\_cunningham}{Ward Cunningham} father of the wiki, ``a wiki is a freely expandable collection of interlinked Web `pages', a hypertext system for storing and modifying information - a database, where each page is easily editable by any user with a forms-capable Web browser client'' {[}1{]} According to Wikipedia : ``a wiki is a website whose users can add, modify, or delete its content via a web browser using a simplified markup language or a rich-text editor'' {[}2{]} You can watch this CommonCraft video \href{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dnL00TdmLY}{wiki in plain english} to better understand what a wiki is. \section{What differentiates the wiki from other co-editing tools ?} The previous definitions show that a wiki is a ``website,'' in other words it is composed of pages that are connected together by hyperlinks.In additiont every authorized person (not all wikis are totally open like Wikipedia) can edit the pages from a web browser, reducing time and space constrains. In case one saves a mistake or for any other reason would like to go back to a previous version, a feature called ``history'' allows users to see previous versions and to roll back any of them. This version history allows also to compare versions avoiding the cluttered of the ``commentaries rainbow'' we are used too in popular Word processors. For example if you work on a wiki page, and come back later on, you will be able to catch up by comparing your last version with the lastest version of someone else. Tools like \href{https://docs.google.com/}{Google Docs} or \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etherpad}{Etherpad} are design to enable co-editing on a single document. This can be seen as a ``wiki way'' of working on a document as it is web based and includes versioning. But it is not a wiki because a single document is not a website. Those tools offer realtime collaboration which wikis do not and are so far easier to use for beginners as they work in \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYSIWYG}{WYSIWYG} mode, which many wikis do not support. However, the advanced features \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki\_syntax}{wiki markup language} make it a more powerful tool. In summary, tools like Googles Docs or Etherpad are a great way to quickly collaborate (synchronously, asynchronously, or a mixture of both) on a single document for free, with a low barrier to entry and no technical support. (Note that Etherpad does have a ``wiki-links'' plugin that can allow it to be used in a more wiki-like way; \href{https://hackpad.com/}{Hackpad} is another real-time editing tool that prominently features linking --- and it claims to be ``the best wiki ever''.) Using a real wiki engine is more interesting for bigger projects and allows a huge number of users to collaborate on the same platform. A wiki reduces the coordination complication as e-mails exchanges are no more needed to coordinate a project. On the other hand it can help us deal with complexity {[}3{]}{[}4{]} especially if you put basic simple rules in place like the Wikipedia's \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPOV}{neutral point of view} to allow every participant to share her or his ideas. Going back to the continuum we talked about before, some tools like Moodle, SharePoint, WordPress, Drupal or others have build in wiki features. Those features can be good but will typically not be as good for wiki-building purposes as a well-developed special-purpose wiki engine. In other words, those tools main focus is not the wiki, which is only a secondary feature. When you choose a real wiki engine like \href{http://www.mediawiki.org/}{Mediawiki}, \href{http://www.tiki.org/}{Tiki}, \href{http://foswiki.org/}{Foswiki}, etc., the wiki will be your platform, not a feature of it. For example if you start a wiki activity in a Moodle course, this wiki will be only visible to a specific group of students and searchable only to those students. On the other hand if your learning platform is a wiki, the whole platform will be searchable to all members regarding their permissions. We are not saying here that a wiki is better than other tools but if you need a wiki engine to address your needs you may consider going with a strong wiki engine rather than a ``micro-wiki'' engine embedded in an other tool. \section[Why use a wiki?]{Why use a wiki?} Those are the main reasons you should consider a wiki for your peer learning projects : \begin{itemize} \item to reduce coordination complication by having a central and always up to date place to store your content. You will reduce e-mail usage drasticly, and have access to your content from everywhere using any operating system \item to keep track of the evolution of your project and be able to view or roll back any previous version of a wiki page using the history feature \item to make links between wiki pages to connect ideas and people but also make links to external URL's. This last possibility is very handy to cite your sources \item to deal with complexity. As a wiki allows anyone to contribute, if you set some easy rules like Wikipedia's NPOV (Neutral Point of View), you will be able to catch more complexity as you will allow everyone to express his or her opinion. Wikis also integrate a forum or comment feature that will help you solve editing conflicts \item to deal with work in progress. A wiki is a great tool to capture an on going work \item to support transparency by letting every members of the community see what others are doing \item to support a network structure as a wiki is by essence an horizontal tool. Using a hyperlinks you will be able to : ``jump by a single clic from a network node to the other, from a computer to an other, from one information to the other, from one univers to the other, from one brain to the other.'' Translated from {[}5{]} \end{itemize} \section{How to choose a wiki engine ?} You will find more than a hundred different wiki engines. The first main distinction is between open source ones that are free to download and commercial ones you will have to pay for. You will find powerful engines on both sides open source and commercial. Sometimes the open source ones look less polished at first sight but are backed by a strong community and offer a lot of customization possibilities. The commercial are sold like a package, they are nicely presented but often they offer less customization on the user side and additional feature or custom made tools will cost you an extra fee. The second distinction that we can make is between wiki farms and self-hosted wikis. The \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki\_hosting\_service}{wiki farm} is a hosting service you can find for both open source or commercial wikis. The goal of those farms is to simplify the hosting of individual wikis. If you don't want to choose a wiki farm hosting, you will have to host the wiki on your own server. This will give you more latitude and data privacy but will require more technical skills and cost you maintenance fees. The \href{http://www.wikimatrix.org/}{Wikimatrix} web site will help you choose the best wiki for your needs. It allows you to compare the features of more than a hundred wiki engines. \href{http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TopTenWikiEngines}{Here} is the top ten list of the best wiki engines by Ward Cunningham. \section{How can a wiki be useful in a peeragogy project ?} A wiki is a good tool collaborative projects and a specially suited for work in progress as you can easily track changes using the history, compare those version and if necessary roll back a previous versions. In other words, nothing gets lost. Here are some ideas about how to use a wiki in a peeragogy project : \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Use a wiki as your learning platform}. It can also support \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/connectivism-practice-how-organize-a-mooc}{Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)}. A wiki will help you organize your\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/organizing-a-learning-context}{learning context}. You can choose to give access to your wiki only to the project participants or open it to the public like \href{http://www.wikipedia.org/}{Wikipedia}. Using hyperlinking, you will operationalize the theory of \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectivism}{connectivism} by connecting nodes together. As a learning platform wikis are powerful because you can easily see what others are doing, share with them, get inspired, merge ideas or link to ideas. In other words, it creates emulation between learners. For additional ressources about wiki in education follow this Diigo \href{http://www.diigo.com/user/regisb/wiki\%20education}{link}. \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Manage your peeragogy project}. A wiki is an excellent tool for project collaboration. Above all, the wiki can be a central place for peer learners to write or link to content. Even if you use several technologies to run your project as we did to write this handbook, at the end of the day, all the content can be centralized on a wiki using direct writing on wiki pages or hyperlinks. This way members can access the content from anywhere and from any device connected to the internet using any platform or application and they will always see the most recent version while being able to browse through the versions history to understand what has changed since their last visit. \end{itemize} \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Publish your project}. As a wiki is a website you can easily use it to show your work to the world. Regarding web design, don't forget that a wiki can look way better than a Wikipedia page if you customize it \end{itemize} \section{Examples of peeragogy projects run on wikis} \href{http://www.appropedia.org/Welcome\_to\_Appropedia}{Appropedia} is a wiki site \emph{for collaborative solutions in }\href{http://www.appropedia.org/Sustainability}{\emph{sustainability}}\emph{, }\href{http://www.appropedia.org/Poverty}{\emph{poverty}}\emph{ reduction and }\href{http://www.appropedia.org/International\_development}{\emph{international development}}\emph{ through the use of sound }\href{http://www.appropedia.org/Principles}{\emph{principles}}\emph{ and }\href{http://www.appropedia.org/Appropriate\_technology}{\emph{appropriate technology}}\emph{ and the sharing of wisdom and}\href{http://www.appropedia.org/Project}{\emph{project}}\emph{ information}. The site is open to stakeholders \emph{to find, create and improve scalable and adaptable solutions.} \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse}{Teahouse} is a peeragogy project run on a wiki that gives newcomers a place to learn about Wikipedia culture and get feedback from experienced Wikipedians. \section[Wiki best practices]{What are the best practices when using a wiki?} \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Cofacilitation} --- help each other learn, help each other administer \item \textbf{Self-election} --- enable people to choose what they want to work on, at their own pace, in their own way \item \textbf{Communication} --- use comment threads and talk pages to discuss wiki changes \item \textbf{Documenting changes} --- most wikis enable editors to write very brief descriptions of their edits \item \textbf{Rules} --- keep rules at a minimum level to avoid chaos without constraining creativity \item \textbf{Fun} --- make it fun for people to contribute \end{itemize} \subsection{Links to other Handbook pages:} You will find more details here about wiki \href{http://peeragogy.org/co-facilitation/}{Co-facilitation} \subsection{Sources} {[}1{]} Leuf, Bo, et Ward, Cunningham. 2001. The Wiki way : quick collaboration on the Web. Boston: Addison-Wesley, xxiii, 435 p. p.14 {[}2{]} \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki} {[}3{]} Andrus, Calvin D. 2005. `` Toward a complex adaptative intelligence community - The wiki and the blog ''. Studies in Intelligence. vol. 49, no 3. Online : \url{http://ssrn.com/abstract=755904}{[}4{]} Barondeau, R\'egis. 2010. `` La gestion de projet croise le wiki ''. \'Ecole des Sciences de la Gestion, Universit\'e du Qu\'ebec Montr\'eal, 180 p. Online : \url{http://www.regisbarondeau.com/Chapitre+4\%3A+Analyse+du+cas\#Synth\_se} {[}5{]} Ayache, G\'erard. 2008. Homo sapiens 2.0 : introduction une histoire naturelle de l'hyperinformation. Paris: Milo, 284 p. p.179 \part{Resources} Resources for Peeragogy.org will blossom further over time. In this section, you will find: \begin{itemize} \item Our advice on \href{http://peeragogy.org/how-to-use-this-handbook/}{How to use this handbook} \item The full \href{http://peeragogy.org/table-of-contents/}{Table of Contents} \item an FAQ (to be added shortly) \item Our \href{http://peeragogy.org/peeragogy-org-roadmap/}{roadmap} for developing peeragogy.org \item Some ideas about \href{http://peeragogy.org/how-to-get-involved/}{how you can get involved in this project} \begin{itemize} \item including some specific instructions for ``\href{http://peeragogy.org/alpha-howto/}{alpha testers}''! \end{itemize} \item Our literature review now appears \href{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer\_learning}{on Wikipedia}: please help us improve it! \item Our ``\href{http://peeragogy.org/meet-the-authors/}{Meet the Authors}'' page describing the peer writing, editing, and creation team \item A ``\href{http://peeragogy.org/contact/}{Contact Us}'' page \item An unfunded \href{http://peeragogy.org/knight-foundation-prototype-fund-proposal-unfunded/}{grant proposal} that we submitted in July, 2012. \item and some \href{http://peeragogy.org/license/}{Licensing information} that indicates how you can re-use this material (in short: without limitation) \end{itemize} \chapter[\textbf{How to get involved}]{How To Get Involved in the Peeragogy Project} \section{For newcomers to the peeragogy project: How to get started} %% \emph{This page is for people who want to help develop/improve this %% handbook. If you want to get involved, contact howard@rheingold.com} %% \emph{Content Creator: Howard Rheingold} %% \emph{Editor: Howard Rheingold} %% \emph{WordPress team: Gigi Johnson, Stephanie Schipper} %% \emph{Visual team: Anna Keune, Amanda Lyons} Welcome! The peeragogy project was kicked off around the time of Howard Rheingold's January 23, 2012 \href{http://vimeo.com/35685124}{Regents Lecture} at UC Berkeley. Since that time (after about 5 months of work), we now have a complete first draft of a handbook for peer learning. For some additional background on the project, have a look our \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy}{wiki page}. There's still more work to be done --- and this page assumes you're interested in getting involved. In that case: we're happy to have you aboard, and what you do here is largely up to you. Go through the orientation material on this page and linked from this page. Poke around. Ask questions --- we're eager to answer them. Find an area where you feel knowledgeable (or are willing to learn) and have a passion to contribute.\textless{}\textless{} Illustration 1 \textgreater{}\textgreater{} The main artifact we are building here is a guide to peer learning: have a look at \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/initial-outline-source-book}{the outline}. In addition to writing, there are other ways to get involved. You could\ldots{} \begin{itemize} \item add bookmarks to our Diigo group \item add relevant links to pages \item write the text for a sub-section (like this one) \item organize a team to tackle a larger section \item make a video \item take notes of live meetings or \href{http://cmapspublic3.ihmc.us/rid=1K81VLSK7-1RL0RQ4-WZK/Peeragogy\%20Cmap.cmap}{grow concept maps} \item organize a newsletter for your group or the whole team \end{itemize} It's up to you. We do have norms and standards that emerge from back-and-forth discussion and resist ready codification. Instead of reading a list of rules, join our conversations, take advantage of the digital memory of a forum to rewind the conversation back closer to the beginning, figure out what the community is like, and jump in. We won't know you've jumped in, though, until you communicate with us about what you'd like to do, who and how you'd like to help, how you think we ought to do it. Contact Howard Rheingold at \href{mailto:howard@rheingold.com}{howard@rheingold.com}. \section{Where to go, what to do when you get there, to learn about how we work} \textless{}\textless{} Illustration 2 \textgreater{}\textgreater{} We use the forums to communicate asynchronously and continuously. We also meet regularly for synchronous audio-video sessions. Information and answers about both methods of communication can be found in the forums. Click on \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum}{the forums tab}. Each forum is a container for conversation threads that can continue for months. The How-to tab can show you how to navigate the forums. Please \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/please-introduce-yourself}{introduce yourself}. After that, the first place you'll want to go is the \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/newcomers-start-here-welcome-center}{newcomer forum topic}, where you can get useful information and ask questions about how things work around here, how to get started. In \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/recaps-and-updates-forum-wiki-tools-handbook-activity}{this thread} you'll find a weekly recap of activity in the forums, wiki, live meetings. \section[Our workflow]{Workflow: How to Create Content for the Handbook} \textless{}\textless{} Illustration 3 \textgreater{}\textgreater{} \begin{enumerate} \item Sign up for a project team in the forum or create one by proposing it in a new comment thread in the \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forums/project-teams}{Project Teams forum}. \item Communicate with other team members through whatever media works best for you --- forum, wiki comments, G+Hangouts, Skype, face to face. Do share what you discuss/decide in the forum. \item Create content on the \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/main-page}{Handbook wiki}, or in any place you'd like that is linked from \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/initial-outline-source-book}{the wiki outline}. \item \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/editorial-team}{Tell the editorial team} that you are ready for an editorial once-over. Make sure you've signed the \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/license}{CC0 Copyright Waiver} (``License'') so that we have permission to redistribute your work without restrictions. \item Editorial team looks at material, communicates with original content creators if necessary, edits content. \item Editorial team and content creation team sign off on the content. When the content is ready to be moved over it will be labled ``RFWP'' next to the content on \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/initial-outline-source-book}{the wiki outline}. \item The WordPress Team is creating the Table of Contents, and Menu for the site. When your content is ready, we will create empty posts for you to copy over your content into on the Wordpress site, and add them to the table of contents. \item One member of your Project Team (or more if needed) should volunteer themselves to move over your content. The WordPress Team will create a username and login for that WP Project Team Editor. If you are a WP Editor for your Team, please post to let us know in the \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/the-wordpress-site}{WordPress Site Forum} and we will add you as an editor. We will need your email address in order to email you your password. \item Once the content has been moved over, mark it in the wiki outline as ``moved to WP'' and content should then be edited there. Make sure to mark your article in the wiki as ``moved to wordpress - view/edit here \textless{}insert your link\textgreater{}''. \item Formatting your post: We will (this is not done yet) use these sample posts for formatting consistency: \href{http://peeragogy.org/how-to-get-involved/}{How to Get Involved} page and the \href{http://peeragogy.org/connectivism-in-practice-how-to-organize-a-mooc/}{How to Organize a MOOC} page. You will be able to use these as examples of how to format your post. \end{enumerate} \section{How to join or start a project team} \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/teaming-signing-flesh-out-parts-outline}{The forum thread about volunteering to help create the handbook.} It's not a contract, but it's a public commitment to say ``I'll do that'' or ``I can help with that.''\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/initial-rough-outline}{This is where we talk about what ought to go in the handbook}, how to organize the outline.The \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forums/project-teams}{Project Teams forum} --- Take a look at the Project Teams and jump in wherever you find a task that interests you. \section{How to create content} WIKI BASICS - Get a look at what people have created using this \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wikichanges}{Recent Changes} page. SIGNING UP FOR A CATEGORY CREATING A PAGE - To create a new wiki page, linked from an existing page: Edit the existing wiki page, type or choosen anchor text to link to your new page, enclose the anchor text in in double brackets, submit the page, click on the new link, create a wiki page, edit its contents, submit. This process is described under \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/page/how}{the How-to tab} as ``\href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/slideshow/creating-a-new-wiki-page}{Creating a New Wiki Page}''. TEMPLATE FOR ENTRIES - Make sure that this is a how-to-do-it-oriented resources. Scaffold with just enough theory, explained without special jargon, to make the how-to-do-it clear. Link to the literature review (and add to the lit review if necessary) for more detailed discussion of empirical, scholarly, theoretical underpinnings of the how-to-do-it. Each page should have: \begin{itemize} \item \textbf{Set of tags}: Specify a set of tags you would like used to refer to material related to this entry. \item \textbf{A ``Status'' line at the very top}, indicating whether it is a stub, an outline for a completed article, a draft in progress, a draft ready for editing, or a draft edited and ready to move to Wordpress. \item \textbf{A list of content creators and editors} after the Status line. \item \textbf{Short summary under the creators/editors list }: Start and maintain a summary (under approximately 300 words) above the body of your entry, either a category or sub-category. \item \textbf{Source citations and Resources:} Make sure direct quotations of material that are not the content creators' own words are clearly identified with quotation marks, immediately followed with enough information for readers to find bibliographic information and/or URLs for all cites in the Resources section; cited sources should be listed with all bibliographic information and URL in the overall list of resources. When you have drafted or substantially changed an entry, the owner should notify the owner of the Resources entry. \item \textbf{Links to related pages.} If another part of the Handbook is particularly relevant, link to it. \item \textbf{Link back to main page of the outline}: Each page should include at the bottom a large link back to the main page of the outline. \end{itemize} A good example of a page that has all these elements, well composed, is \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/wiki/connectivism-practice-how-organize-a-mooc}{Connectivism in Action: How to Organize a MOOC}. COMMENT THREADS ATTACHED TO WIKI PAGES - Adding a comment to a wiki page will start a comment thread or append the new comment to the existing thread in chronological order. Comment threads on wiki pages can focus on discussions of the specific additions and changes proposed to this wiki team by the project team members for this entry. You can toggle between a wiki page and a page of comments by means of the ``Talk'' tab, next to the View, Edit, Outline, Revisions, and Access control tabs. \section{How we communicate} FORUMS - The asynchronous (participate whenever you'd like) conversations in the forums are how the community of peeragogy handbook creators formed. It's where we engage in exended discussions of issues and decisions raised in live sessions. It's where we keep track of which different teams are working on which material. It's where the small teams can engage with the community as a whole. It's a place to ask questions, propose changes, volunteer to help, hand off work to the next team. LIVE SESSIONS - We meet synchronously at agreed-upon times, using audio, video, text chat, slides, screen-sharing. For groups of ten or more, we use Blackboard Collaborate, for which Howard has a 50-seat-at-a-time license. These sessions are recorded. For information about scheduling, and recordings, see \href{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/live-sessions-schedule-recordings-notes-mindmaps}{the forum topic}. Participation requires a fairly fast (broadband) Internet connection, a microphone or headset, and (if you wish), a webcam. For groups of ten or smaller (usually for project teams), we use Google+ Hangouts. Individual teams do their own scheduling. TWITTER LIST - To get added to the Peeragogy Twitter list please post your Twitter name here : \url{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy/forum/the-tools-we-are-using-and-how-access-them}. Stephanie Schipper will then add you. TWITTER HASHTAG: \#peeragogy \section{Questions?} If you have questions, use the forums, post a comment on the Talk page for this wiki entry, email the team energy center, or email \href{mailto:howard@rheingold.com}{howard@rheingold.com} % \chapter{Literature Review: Learning Theories Supporting Peeragogy} \chapter{ Style Guide } \subsection{Keep it short} The easiest sections to read are those that are shorter and include some kind of visual (video or image) and have some personal connection (i.e. they tell a story). For anything longer, break it up into sub-pages, add visuals, make sure each sub-page is accessible to someone (who is it?). Think clearly of this reader, talk to them. \subsection{Use of bullet points} Maybe this is just a ``pet peeve'', but I find text very hard to read when there are more than a few bullet points included. For me, it works better when the bullet points are replaced with numbered lists (which should still be used sparingly). It also seems that when many disjointed bullet points appear, sometimes the author is really just indexing the main points that are presented better in someone else's narrative. Therefor, consider replacing an entire bulleted list with a reference to someone else's book/webpage/chapter. In today's hyperlinked world, it's easy enough for the reader to go elsewhere to get good content (and indeed, we should make it easy for them to find the best treatments around!). In particular, it is not entirely pleasant to \emph{read} a taxonomy. Maybe that sort of thing can be moved into an appendix if we need to have it. \subsection{Including Activities} In today's live meeting, we agreed that activities would not magically solve all possible usability/readability problems, but they are good to have anyway. And, according to our page layout, each chapter should have at least one activity (linked to from the sidebar). So, when reading the book, please make note of any activity that can be included. (Also make note of problems that \emph{won't} be solved by adding activities!) \subsection{Simple, not Conversational} In our efforts to escape from academia-speak and simplify the text in the handbook, it's important to make sure we are not heading towards the other extreme --- being too conversational. When we're having a conversation with someone, we tend to pepper our ideas with transitional or pivotal phrases (``In any event,'' ``With that said,'' ``As I mentioned elsewhere,'' etc.) that help to keep the talk flowing. We also go off on brief tangents before making our way back to the main topic, and sometimes express ourselves in run-on sentences. While this is perfectly natural in speech, it can be confusing and complex when being read (in our handbook or elsewhere). Let's stay conscious of our audience and try to meet that perfect balance of simple, yet professional in our writing. \chapter{Meet the Team} \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Bryan.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Bryan.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Bryan Alexander --- USA, VT (Author)}I research the ways new technologies change education, teaching, learning, and scholarship. I'm passionate about storytelling, gaming, pedagogy, and understanding the future. My family homesteads on top of a little mountain, raising food. \href{https://twitter.com/\#!/BryanAlexander}{Bryan on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{http://bryanalexander.org/}{Bryan's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Paul.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Paul.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Paul Allison --- USA, NY (Author)} Currently, I teach English at the \href{http://bronxbash.com}{Bronx Academy Senior High}. Another community that I'm a part of is the \href{http://nycwritingproject.org}{New York City Writing Project}. I'm the NYC Technology Liaison for the \href{http://nwp.org}{National Writing Project}. I help to manage \href{http://youthvoices.net\%20}{Youth Voices} and I co-produce \href{http://teachersteachingteachers.org}{Teachers Teaching Teachers}. \href{https://plus.google.com/u/0/113993022447291199374/about}{Paul on Google+} \textbar{} \href{http://teachersteachingteachers.org}{Paul's personal website}\href{http://teachersteachingteachers.org}{} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Maria.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Maria.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Mar\'ia F. Arenas --- República Argentina} \textbf{(Author, Editor)}\textbf{}Independent consultant researcher on TICS applied to Learning, Digital Communication, Institutional, Corporate. On line facilitator tutorship. Professor on Semiotics, Social Communication, Networking. Non Violent Communication. \href{https://plus.google.com/u/0/stream/circles/p2e54657d0d6fc86d}{Mar\'ia on Google+} \textbar{} \textbf{ }\href{http://arenastudies.wordpress.com/}{Mar\'ia's personal website} \marktransitionempty \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Regis.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Regis.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{R\'egis Barondeau --- Canada} \textbf{(Author)}\textbf{}I build bridges between research, praxeology and technology and I become creative ``by finding a likeness between things which were not thought alike before'' (Bronowski, 1958). I'm interested in complexity, culture, social media especially wikis, education, open government and more. Reach \href{https://twitter.com/regisbarondeau}{R\'egis on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{http://www.regisbarondeau.com}{Regis' personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Doug.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Doug.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Doug Breitbart --- USA, NJ (Author, Meeting Support)}I am first and foremost a catalyst and provocateur who has worn the hats of attorney, consultant, facilitator, coach, entrepreneur, father, husband, student, teacher, and passionate believer in a networked, wired and semantic world. \href{http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=791427\&trk=tab\_pro}{Doug on LinkedIn} \textbar{} \href{www.ontologique.com}{Doug's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Suz.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Suz.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Suz Burroughs - USA, CA} \textbf{(Author, Designer)}Suz Burroughs is an Instructional Designer who specializes in adult learners and online learning. She was a Haas Scholar at the University of California Berkeley and received a Masters in Education with an option in Online Teaching and Learning from California State University East Bay. %% She %% freelances in the music industry on the side and volunteers mentor to %% first generation college school students because she is one. She opened %% her own business in 1997, and she joined Google in 2010 where she %% teaches on the Global Innovation faculty in addition to working on %% learning design projects. She has taught in over 30 states, 5 countries, %% and, of course, online. \href{http://susanburroughs.squarespace.com/}{Suz' personal website} \marktransitionempty \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Joe.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Joe.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Joe Corneli --- U.K.} \textbf{(Author, Editor)} Joe Corneli does research on the anthropology of modern mathematics. He is a member of the board of directors of the US-based nonprofit, PlanetMath.org, and a research student at the Knowledge Media Institute of The Open University, UK. Reach \href{http://identi.ca/arided}{Joe on Identi.ca} \textbar{} \href{http://metameso.org/\ensuremath{\sim}joe\%20}{Joe's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Charlie.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Charlie.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Charles Jeffrey Danoff --- USA, IL} \textbf{(Author)} Charles is the Owner of Mr. Danoff's Teaching Laboratory, an Educational Publishing and Services firm he established in 2009. With Joe Corneli, he started publishing research on Paragogy, Peeragogy's inspiration, in late 2010. \href{http://identi.ca/mrd}{Charles on Identi.ca} \textbar{} \href{http://mr.danoff.org}{Charles' personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/James.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/James.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{James Folkestad - USA, CO (Author, Editor, Designer, Developer)}My approach to education has shifted from an emphasis on my teaching, to a more central focus on student learning, and finally to an activity-systems approach as I have come to realize that the two (teacher and learner) are inseparable parts of the learning ecosystem. %% Having a focus on %% technology, I consider how tools can be used, not for novelty, but to %% support more productive system-wide engagement in which social and %% cultural interactions take place. It is in these interactions that %% learning, understanding, and innovative inferences expand. Reach \href{https://plus.google.com/u/0/114552232610071440407/about}{James on Google+} \textbar{} \href{http://edgility.net}{James' personal website} \marktransitionempty \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Gigi.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Gigi.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Gigi Johnson, EdD --- USA, CA (Author, Developer)} I mix formal learning programs with programs to help learners begin to work, live, and create everywhere. My own adventures include writing, singing, video, teaching, and parenting 3 teens. \href{http://twitter.com/maremel}{Gigi on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{http://maremel.com}{Gigi's personal page} \marktransition \textbf{Anna Keune --- Germany/Finland} \textbf{(Co-author, Designer)} I design technology for learning and I like it. \href{https://twitter.com/\#!/akeune}{Anna on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{www.annakeune.com}{Anna's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \vspace{-3em} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Roland.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Roland.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Roland Legrand --- Belgium (Author)} I'm a financial journalist, heavily involved in experimenting with social media and new forms for reporting and community conversation. \href{http://www.twitter.com/rolandlegrand}{Roland on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{http://www.mixedrealities.com}{Roland's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Amanda.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Amanda.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Amanda Lyons --- \textbf{USA}, NY} \textbf{Designer}\textbf{}I am a Visual Practitioner, Organization Development Consultant \& Experiential Educator. I love helping people communicate via visual tools that generally include markers and paper. I think our education system could benefit from using visual communication tools as well as text based methods. Reach \href{https://twitter.com/\#!/amanda\_lyons}{Amanda on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{www.visualsforchange.com/blog\%20\%20}{Amanda's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Christopher.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Christopher.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Christopher Neal --- USA, WA} \textbf{(Communications and Media)} I am driven by technology and its ability to modify virtual communities and social media, and a passion for Social:Learn, Social:iA, Situated Cognition, Social Learning Theory, Connectivism, etc. \href{https://plus.google.com/u/0/106960445015668581969/posts}{Christopher on Google+} \textbar{} \href{http://beyondcredentials.com/index.php?option=com\_bc\_profile\_pages\&uname=berkeleyalum}{Christopher's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \vspace{-1em} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Ted.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Ted.jpg}} \vspace{-2em} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Ted Newcomb --- USA, AZ} \textbf{(Author, Project Management)} Happily retired grandpa, curating on digital culture, sociology of the web; interested in collaboration and cooperation in digital networks that result in positive change. \href{http://about.me/tcnewcomb}{Ted on About.me} \textbar{} \href{http://www.tcnewcomb.com}{Ted's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \vspace{-1em} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Howard.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Howard.jpg}} \vspace{-1em} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Howard Rheingold --- USA, CA} \textbf{(Author, Editor)} Inspired by Charles Danoff and Joe Corneli's work on paragogy, I instigated the Peeragogy project in order to provide a resource for self-organizing self-learners. Learning is my passion. Reach \href{https://twitter.com/\#!/hrheingold}{Howard on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{http://www.rheingold.com}{Howard's personal website} \marktransition \begin{wrapfigure}[]{l}{2in} \vspace{-1em} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Paola.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Paola.jpg}} \end{wrapfigure} \textbf{Paola Ricaurte --- Mexico} \textbf{(Author)} My believe: education and technology are essential tools for social change. My challenges: activist, teacher, mother, immigrant. My philosophy: I am what I am because of who we all are. \href{https://twitter.com/paolaricaurte}{Paola on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{http://blogs.eluniversal.com.mx/virtualis/}{Paola's personal website} \marktransitionempty and \marktransitionempty \begin{minipage}{3in} \textbf{Geoff Walker --- U.K. (Author)} A Further and Higher Education Lecturer and Tutor with 12 years experience of teaching in a wide range of subject areas. Social networker, e-learning advocate and user of blended learning techniques which follow from experience of teaching distance learning. \href{https://twitter.com/\#!/geoffreyawalker}{Geoff on Twitter} \textbar{} \href{http://geoffreyawalker.blog.co.uk}{Geoff's personal website} \begin{center} \href{http://peeragogy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Geoff.jpg}{ \includegraphics{./pictures/Geoff.jpg}} \end{center} \end{minipage} \clearpage \chapter{ License } These materials are made available under the terms of \href{http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/}{Creative Commons 0 copyright waiver} instead of a ``traditional'' copyleft license. We the undersigned agree to the following, wherein ``this work'' refers to ``The Peeragogy Handbook'' and all other content posted on \href{http://peeragogy.org}{peeragogy.org} or the original collaboratory site, \url{http://socialmediaclassroom.com/host/peeragogy}. \textbf{I hereby waive all copyright and related or neighboring rights together with all associated claims and causes of action with respect to this work to the extent possible under the law.} Signed: \begin{itemize} \item Bryan Alexander \item Paul Allison \item R\'egis Barondeau \item Doug Breitbart \item Suz Burroughs \item Joseph Corneli \item Charles Jeffrey Danoff \item Julian Elve \item Mar\'ia Fernanda \item James Folkestad \item Kathy Gill \item Gigi Johnson \item Anna Keune \item Roland Legrand \item [Amanda Lyons] \item Ted Newcomb \item [Christopher Neal] \item Stephanie Parker \item David Preston \item Howard Rheingold \item Paola Ricaurte \item Stephanie Schipper \end{itemize} Note that this waiver does not apply to other works by the above authors, including works linked to from \href{http://peeragogy.org}{peeragogy.org}. It also does not apply to embedded content drawn from other sites and included for the reader's convenience. Future contributors: Note also that we will require a similar copyright waiver agreement. That said, the waiver also means that you are free to do essentially whatever you like with the content in your own work! Have fun! \subsubsection{How we came to this decision} These Creative Commons license options were proposed by various members of the community: \begin{itemize} \item \emph{CC Zero} - public domain; no restrictions for downstream users \item \emph{CC By-SA} - requires downstream users to include attribution and to license their work in the same way \item \emph{CC By-SA-NC} - requires downstream users to include attribution, to license their work in the same way and disallows any commercial use of the content \end{itemize} After a brief discussion, no one was in favor of restricting downstream users, so we decided to go with CC0. We agreed that we would get enough ``credit'' by having our names on \href{http://peeragogy.org/}{peeragogy.org}. In connection with this discussion, we agreed that we would work on ways to explicitly build ``reusability'' into the handbook content. \end{document}