📖 Source→⚡ Observation·Where the pattern works/Where the pattern breaks·Interpretation ≠ Conclusion

Peeragogy in Practice

Scrapbook

⏱ 6 minPAT

Motivation

This pattern describes a way to make the project meaningful.

Context

We have been working together for a while now. We have maintained and revised our pattern catalog, and we are achieving some of the “What’s Next” steps associated with some of the patterns.

Forces

Attention: due to limited energy, we need to ask: where should we set the focus?

Interest: new experiences catch our attention.

Meaning: shared history makes things meaningful.

Problem

Not all of the ideas we’ve come up with have proved workable. Not all of the patterns we’ve noticed remain equally relevant. In particular, some patterns no longer lead to concrete next steps.

Solution

In order to maintain focus, is important to “tune” and “prune” the things we give our attention to. We can connect this understanding to any actions undertaken in the project by asking questions like these:

(1) Review what was supposed to happen. (2) Establish what is happening/happened. (3) Determine what’s right and wrong with what we are doing/have done. (4) What did we learn or change? (5) What else should we change going forward? [9], after [10].

Other review processes have been formalized, including the design review in architecture and the postmortem in theater and other teamwork settings [7,8]. The review process may benefit from having an experienced facilitator on board [6]. As current priorities become clearer, we decide where to focus. Anything that isn’t receiving active attention should be moved to a Scrapbook. This may encompass:

  • Retired patterns that are tabled or completed (no more next steps);
  • Proto-patterns made of problems, issues, and concerns;
  • A back-catalog of publications, reports, or other artifacts.

In the Peeragogy project, alongside our patterns we initially maintained a collection of antipatterns (like ‘Magical thinking’) but the next steps coming from these seemed particularly convoluted and abstract. So, we archived them.[fn:1] problems – without known solutions – right up front in the Introduction to the Peeragogy Handbook [9]. Other proto-patterns include ‘Onboarding’ and ‘Don’t quit your day job’, which arose in our review of this paper (see “Emergent roadmap”, below). Our back-catalog includes academic papers [14] and a thesis [5]. Everyone can maintain their own personal Scrapbook as along with a communal one. Furthermore, you don’t need to limit yourself to your own creativity: include interesting ideas from other sources (see Reduce, reuse, recycle). In some cases a designated Wrapper may have to do further work to elicit and organize contributions.

Rationale

We want to keep attention focused on the most relevant issues. If a pattern, task, or concern does not lead to concrete “next steps” at the moment, sufficient time for reflection may offer a better understanding, and it may prove useful and actionable in a different context.

Resolution

Judicious use of the Scrapbook can help focus project participants’ attention on current concerns, without losing grasp of items of interest. The currently active pattern catalog is leaner and more action-oriented as a result. If the Roadmap shows where we’re going, it is the Scrapbook that shows most clearly where we’ve been, and collects the observations that are most meaningful to us.

Example 1

The history of the Wikimedia Foundation, and of Wikipedia, are maintained as wiki pages.[fn:2],[fn:3] Wikipedia details outstanding issues, in the form of critiques.[fn:4] available to help facilitate the process of vetting proposed fine-grained changes to articles.[fn:5],[fn:6] typically discussed at the Village Pump, and there are mechanisms in place for settling disputes.[^7^],[fn:7]

\ Park: Christ’s Pieces, Cambridge, UK

Example 2

Just as a university campus grows and changes over time, future peeragogues will be drawn to new problems and patterns. They will trace new paths and build new emergent structures (Figure [christs-pieces]).

What’s Next in the Peeragogy Project

BACK Revisit outtakes and use them as compost pile :handbook:

  • We have hung on to a bunch of outtakes. Maybe these should be restored in the form of mini-Handbooks?
  • Some Outtakes are here

BACK Connect Patterns, Next Steps PARs, and CLA :paper:

We have collected a bunch of PARs, but they haven’t been analysed. The overall framework is something like this: | Patterns | Solutions | | Next Steps | Action plan | | PARs | Black Box | | CLA | Problems | and this then runs in a cycle: Patterns → Next Steps → PARs → CLA [Loop].

  • We have experimented with these methods in the Emacs Research Group

BACK Process ‘orphan’ chapters :handbook:

BACK Software Tools :website:

  • Do some workshops to help everyone get up to speed with Emacs software

BACK Emacs Research Group, meetings, report back with PARs, maybe a chapter + tools Peeragogy bolt-on for Emacs :community:

BACK Workshop w/ Emacs groups to share Org Mode skills :course:

BACK Submit other papers :paper:

  • PLoP
  • European Journal of Future Studies
  • …?

BACK Mailing list :website:

BACK Events :website:

BACK What to do with the PARs :website:

— e.g., put them into the Dashboard and then… To report on at start of next Quarterly meeting Joe + Stephan + Charlie

References

  1. J Corneli, A Keune, A Lyons, and CJ Danoff. 2013. Peeragogy in Action. In The Open Book, Kaitlyn Braybrooke, Jussi Nissilä and Timo Vuorikivi (eds.). The Finnish Institute, London, 80–87.

  2. J. Corneli. 2012. Paragogical praxis. E-Learning and Digital Media 9, 3: 267–272. Retrieved from http://paragogy.net/ParagogicalPraxisPaper

  3. J. Corneli and C.J. Danoff. 2011. Paragogy. /Proceedings of the 6th Open Knowledge Conference/. Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-739/paper+5.pdf

  4. Joseph Corneli, Dorota Marciniak, Charles Jeffrey Danoff, et al. 2014. Building the Peeragogy Accelerator. /Proceedings of OER14: Building communities of open practice/. Retrieved from http://metameso.org/~joe/docs/Building_the_Peeragogy_Accelerator.pdf

  5. Joseph Corneli. 2014. Peer produced peer learning: A mathematics case study. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/40775/

  6. Richard P Gabriel. 2002. /Writer’s Workshops and the Work of Making Things: Patterns, Poetry./ Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.

  7. Norman Kerth. 2001. /Project retrospectives: A handbook for team reviews/. Dorset House.

  8. John Mathers, Sue Illman, Angela Brady, and Peter Geraghty. 2013. Design Review: Principles and Practice. Retrieved from http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/11214/dc_cabe_design_review_13_w__1_.pdf

  9. H. Rheingold and others. 2015. The Peeragogy Handbook. PubDomEd*Pierce Press, Chicago, IL.*Somerville, MA. Retrieved from http://peeragogy.org

  10. US Army. 1993. A Leader’s Guide to After-Action Reviews (TC 25-20). Retrieved from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/tc_25-20/tc25-20.pdf

[fn:1] http://paragogy.net/Scrapbook

[fn:2] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/History_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation

[fn:3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia

[fn:4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia

[fn:5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges

[fn:6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Recent_changes_patrol#Tools

[fn:7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment

⚡ Unpeeragogy · Friction · Observation

The Scrapbook Is a Dump

⏱ 4 minaudit-v2scrapbooktemporarystorage

The Assumption

The Scrapbook pattern describes a temporary holding space for items that do not yet fit into the project’s taxonomy. Items accumulate here until the structure is revised to accommodate them, serving as a signal that organizational categories need updating.

Operational Reality

The scrapbook is not temporary storage. It is where good intentions go to die.

The vault records show scrapbooks failing through decision-stagnation and authority-attrition. Items accumulate. Categories are never revised. The scrapbook becomes a permanent holding pattern — a monument to the group’s inability to decide what matters. GitLab’s stewardship handbook shows that explicit governance boundaries enable smooth organizational evolution. Drupal’s governance transition demonstrates that without authority to revise structure, scrapbook items accumulate until they define the project by weight of what could not be categorized.

The scrapbook pattern assumes organizational categories will evolve naturally. They do not. They require someone with authority to decide when the structure has changed enough.

Empirical Evidence

Resilience Cases (Confirming):

  • GitLab Stewardship Handbook — Explicit documentation of governance boundaries between corporate sponsor and community reduces friction. Clear authority boundaries enable smooth organizational evolution without permanent holding patterns.

Fracture Cases (Complicating):

  • Drupal Governance — Intentional governance transition from BDFL to community model required years of structural work. Without authority to revise structure, scrapbook items accumulate until they define the project by weight.

Operational Heuristics

Positive Boundary: The scrapbook works when explicit governance boundaries define who has authority to revise organizational structure — clear authority boundaries enable smooth organizational evolution.

Negative Boundary: Do not implement a scrapbook when taxonomic authority is unclear or contested — the pattern assumes natural organizational evolution, but evidence shows that without explicit governance boundaries, the scrapbook becomes a permanent black hole.

Epistemic Synthesis

The scrapbook is not temporary storage. It is where good intentions go to die. GitLab shows that clear authority boundaries enable smooth organizational evolution. Drupal shows that without authority to revise structure, scrapbook items accumulate until they define the project by weight of what could not be categorized. Categories do not evolve naturally. They require someone with authority to decide when the structure has changed enough.

Perturbatore: “What if the scrapbook isn’t temporary storage — it’s where good intentions go to die — and items accumulate because nobody has the authority to decide what they actually are?”

The scrapbook does not hold items. It holds decisions no one made.

Evidence Status

Status Count
Confirmed cases 1
Cases under study 0
Unverified cases 0
Ambiguous cases 0

Traceability

Run: audit-v2 · Delta: 1.1 → 1.1575 (±0.0575) · Diversity D: 2

References

💬 Field Report: The Scrapbook Is a Dump

Every pattern in the Handbook has been tested in the real world — and the real world usually has something to say about it. If you tried something similar, or saw it fail differently, share the story here.

Write in your native language — the browser will translate. Lowering the entry barrier is more important than choosing the "right" language. GitHub translates threads automatically so everyone can follow along.
Read how evidence is collected →

✏️ Share your story🔍 Structural analysis📋 Browse field reports
What happens after I share my story?

1. Your post appears in GitHub Discussions in the Field reports category.

2. Once a week, the project reads new threads and checks for patterns worth integrating.

3. If your story reveals a new Failure Vector, a revision to tension_index, or a sharper edge for the Perturbator — the entry gets updated.

4. The change is logged at /log and goes live on the next deploy.

Don't have a GitHub account? Here's how it works

GitHub Discussions is free. You need a GitHub account (30 seconds to create one).

Once you're signed in, click "Share your story" above. Write in your own language — the thread will be translated for everyone else automatically.

You don't need to know how to code. You don't need to know what "git" is. You just need an observation that the theory didn't match reality.

What are GitHub Discussions? →

Every pattern raises more questions than it answers.
Read the theory. Then look at what happened.

🗂️ Browse all patternsWhy this project? →← Back home