Resources

INTRODUCTION TO PEERAGOGY

⏱ 19 min

Frontmatter

Author Bios

Abstract.

Peeragogy is a practical theory of peer learning and peer production. While these activities are widespread, the Peeragogy project is distinctive in that it uses peer production and peer learning to study and improve the way peer production and peer learning work.

Two practical questions we have examined in the Peeragogy project are:

  • How can informal learning endeavors reflect on what they have accomplished?
  • How can they extract lessons that will improve their future collaboration?

We introduce the methodology that we use, in a way that others can leverage in their own reflections. This article takes the form of a syllabus for a three week, six hour course. Our intention is to run the course once and then make it self-guided with the use of pre-recorded materials.

Keywords

Peeragogy. Peer Pedagogy. Education. Project Action Review, Transdisciplinary Design.

Letter to people who signed up

Dear Peers,

We are preparing the syllabus for the course and you can find our draft here, and comment on it if you wish!

INTRODUCTION

General Objective

The Peeragogy project was started in 2012, based on a presentation made by media scholar Howard Reingold at UC Berkeley. The project explores Peer Learning and Peer Production, and uses these methods in the process. We want to find better ways to share what we have been learning. We already give away free copies of the Peeragogy Handbook, a collaboratively-written text. We thought: could we teach a course on peeragogy that uses the Handbook as a course text, and that makes the material even more accessible to more people?

Specific objectives

We had to resolve a central dilemma. Since peeragogy concerns peer learning and peer production, is it really appropriate to “teach” a course on the subject? Shouldn’t the course be co-created together with peers --- learning and working together --- in order to best convey the subject? Some of the questions we asked as we were framing this document are:

  • What’s the learning outcomes?
  • What’s actually going to happen in this course?
  • Will this be clear to readers within one or two pages?
  • Is there an existing FAQ that we can draw upon?
  • What are the roles that people will take on in the course?
  • Who are the Charlie, Ray, Joe, Vitor of the next conversation?

Problem statement

The Peeragogy Project was convened by media scholar Howard Rheingold in 2012, and charged with being a living resource “for any group of people who want to learn anything.”

We would love to discuss aspects of learning and working collaboratively! However, to be efficient, we have developed this three-week, six-session syllabus course that serves as an introduction to peeragogy. We leave resources like the Peeragogy Handbook for self-paced study. In peeragogical fashion, course participants will be crucial to the course experience.

The course syllabus can also be read as a research report, summarising what we have learned by studying peeragogy. The course will focus on methods, and we will strive to involve members of the course as co-research-investigators for the next experiment. Our research question is: how effective are the methods we have developed for people who are new to peeragogy?

Justification

There are various resources for learning peeragogy: the Peeragogy Handbook, videos, papers, ongoing meetings, and others. We want to create a short introduction that can serve as a map or guide to the rest of peeragogy.

Our primary hypothesis going into this short experiment is that students who spend 2 hours a week for three weeks in course will not only have access to the material, but that they will want to use it; and that they will see a benefit from engaging with peeragogical practices. This will be assessed (1) with ongoing review of actions taken during the course and (2) with a follow-up interview.

METHODOLOGY

Pilot Courses

  • We previously ran several small online pilot courses (add years, places, etc)
  • We also prepared a longer and more traditional syllabus for a course on “Transdisciplinary design” (to be presented in what university?)

Invitation of participants

  • We invited people by Twitter. 35 people signed up in response to our first call for participation. (why?)
  • We plan to circulate another call for participants in connection with a Workshop we will run at the Connected Learning Summit 2021.

Structuring the experience

The Peeragogy course is structured in six one-hour sessions over three weeks.

  • Half of the sections are Discussions (adapting the “Lecture” format to a peer learning model) based on flipped classroom model discussed by xyz authors.
  • The other half of the sections involve hands-on collaboration in a Workshop setting (adapting the “Practical” format to a peer production model) based on project based learning described by xyz authors
  • The course will be offered once, free of charge, recorded, edited and offered back to the academic community.
  • Both this syllabus and the recordings will be available under CC-Zero, permitting maximal reuse.
  • We expect that we or others could run a slightly different format of this course for different audiences.

Analysis of materials

  • The course will demonstrate and apply three primary methods of analysis and design, such as xyz, but also open to new approaches that might be brought by the attendees.
  • The first is the Project Action Review, which we adapt from the After Action Review
  • The second is Causal Layered Analysis, which was developed by Sohail Inayatullah
  • The third is Design Pattern Languages, introduced by Christopher Alexander.

COURSE OVERVIEW

Short presentations followed by discussions (not lectures)

This short Seasonal School treats the past, present, and future of Peeragogy. The Peeragogy project was convened by Howard Rheingold in connection with his 2011 University of California Berkeley Regents Lecture. Since then, an international group of peeragogues have published three editions of the Peeragogy Handbook, and are planning a fourth edition. In this short Winter School, we acquaint participants with our key findings and imagine the future of the project together. The following subsections outline the three Discussion sections.

Workshops

The following subsections outline the course Workshops. This is where course participants will create new materials together. We discuss some examples of artifacts that have been created in previous pilot versions of the course.

SYLLABUS

Discussion 1. How Peeragogy Came to Be

In this first session, we lead a discussion of the precursors and groundwork for the peeragogy project. Participants will facilitate a Q&A session, and we’ll do some activities to get a feel for peeragogy in this group.

Introductions (< 12 min)

Everybody attending (except us): 30 seconds each

Presentations (15 min):

  • 5 min an origin of the project
  • 2 min example of peeragogy in action with language students teaching each other English
  • 2 min example of peeragogy in publishing (incl. Peeragogy Handbook)
  • 2 min peeragogy in a business context
  • 2 min about “peer produced peer learning”, pointing out that this presentation is an example
  • 2 min outlining what’s to come in the next sessions

Discussion (48 minutes, i.e., 60 mins minus time for introductions):

  • Brief intro to meeting roles (†) so we can demonstrate them.
  • Q&A about “what is peeragogy?”
  • Ask the audience for examples: when have they learned from peers and produced things with peers; also, what worked well, and what didn’t work well?
  • Activity: 15 min. Work in pairs or groups of 3. Do what Professor Salomão Gomez says: he has a design thinking methodology for peer groups; we need to engage back to our childhood to engage laughing. Maybe eat sugary foods, tell a secret. Make a friend!
  • Activity: Come back together and share one agreed-upon highlight with the whole group together.

Missions for next week

  • Sign up for the mailing list[fn:: https://lists.peeragogy.org/mailman/listinfo/peeragogy-handbook]

  • Recommend participants sign up for daily digests if they don’t wish to get lots of individual messages!

  • Participants will be asked to post and send written self-introductions in the forum.

  • Send one question or observation about peeragogy to the mailing list

  • Answer one other person’s question

Workshop 1: A kaiju introduction to peeragogy (Corneli and Danoff)

This workshop will introduce attendees to peeragogy: an interconnected collection of techniques for peer learning and peer production. The learning mind-set and strategies we are uncovering can be applied by students, teachers, groups of friends, communities of practice, hackerspaces, organizations, wikis, and/or networked collaborations across an entire society! In this workshop, we put peeragogy into action as we break into small groups and play “Flaws of the Smart City”, a futures studies game that imagines scenarios for the evolution of urban environments. After playing, each group will do a Project Action Review to reflect on lessons learned. Subsequently, the groups will present their PARs to the wider audience so everyone can learn from their experience and extract patterns. Finally, all attendees will “hive edit” a 500 to 1,000 word writeup of the workshop that will be included in the upcoming fourth edition of the Peeragogy Handbook.

Sixty minute workshop timeline

2 Minutes 30 Seconds

We initially proposed to use your recent video Intro to Peeragogy[fn:: https://youtu.be/5cPNwpK1ctg] — we could ask you to say the same material “live”.

12 Minutes 30 Seconds - Presentation of the workshop timeline and succinct description of the methods we will experiment with today.

Flaws of the Smart City, Project Action Review, and the Causal Layered Analysis outline --- and a brief demo of “Flaws of the Smart City” --- allowing time for Q&A.

20 Minutes - Play Flaws of the Smart City in small teams.

Joe will pre-generate some different games.

5 Minutes — Each team does a Project Action Review.

Perhaps best if there’s someone with some experience in each breakout room to facilitate this.

5 Minutes - Each group presents their PAR about how their game went

We will take notes into the CLA template to distill something.

10 minutes - Discussion / Q&A with workshop facilitators

(Howard, Charlie, Joe) to discuss next steps, with the document we created open for people to look at and edit if they choose

Discussion 2: Action and Change in Peer Learning

This week, we begin with short presentations from people who have been involved for a while, who share their experiences to spark discussion.

Presentations

  • 3 min on the Peeragogy Handbook 1st-4th Editions, and hive editing
  • 3 min on the wrap, communications, context, software
  • 3 min on the broader context of peeragogy in research and teaching (e.g., futures studies, AI, online communities and networks)

Discussions (60 min):

  • Presentations from the participants: What are some collaborative projects that attendees have been part of? What are things you would like to do with these concepts? How could the Peeragogy project be helpful to attendees? Who else should we invite for the next session Q&A panel? What might entice them to join the discussion?

  • Jointly take notes

  • Activity: 30 mins. “Hive edit” a new chapter for the Handbook right here and now about the seminar, jointly expressing what participants have shared about what they are interested in? (Google Docs / Etherpad? --- if participants are willing to contribute under CC0)

Missions for next week

  • Think about and prepare for discussion of how to take peeragogy to the next level inside and outside educational institutions.
  • Send one idea about this to the mailing list
  • Respond to one other person’s idea on the mailing list

Method: Project action review

  1. Review the intention: what do we expect to learn or make together?
  2. Establish what is happening: what and how are we learning?
  3. What are some different perspectives on what’s happening?
  4. What did we learn or change?
  5. What else should we change going forward?

Example:

Here’s how we filled in the template on 29072021:

1. Review the intention: what do we expect to learn or make together?

Make the course starting with an initial handout that we could send to the ≈30 people who signed up so far.

2. Establish what is happening: what and how are we learning?

We went through the intro bullet points and revised the first two sessions to make it more participatory, take out names of specific hosts, added a cool icebreaker format instead of the Flaws workshop.

3. What are some different perspectives on what’s happening?

  • We feel more confident that a beginner might make sense of the intro section.
  • Nice to focus on this rather than getting distracted with our Patterns of Patterns paper for today.

4. What did we learn or change?

  • Clarified details of the experiment, integrating it more thoroughly into the 1st section.
  • Moved some details to an appendix (old content of poster doesn’t fit right in the middle of the syllabus, but it could become a presentation for the 1st day, we may not need or want presentations beyond the first day because the goal is to get people engaged)

5. What else should we change going forward?

  • Need to finish the rest of the sections
  • Integrate this into the website, so that people don’t get overloaded.
  • Check at the end of the syllabus with smaller questions like, “Are you motivated, what worked, what didn’t work?”
  • Is there a way to make a version of this for Brookes, as a professional development course, e.g., within the network?

Workshop 2: Practical Workshop: Pizza Stories (Facilitators: Puzio and Bruno)

Placeholder content:

Litany layer: Imagine a couple who on some of their first dates enjoy going out for pizza. They like different toppings, but that doesn’t particularly matter, because each of them orders their own perfectly sized Neapolitan-style pizza, and eats it with gusto. Indeed, it turns out they like pizza so much that they would like to have it several nights a week. Going out that frequently would be expensive, so they erect a brick oven in their backyard and get good at making their own pizzas at home: selecting good ingredients, fermenting the dough, and baking at a high temperature. After some time goes by, they have gotten really good at this, and they daydream about opening their own restaurant. They look into some available practical guidance and adapt it for their use case. After a lot of planning and a whole lot of work, they get their new pizza restaurant up and running, and they are doing good business. However, as more time goes by, they begin to notice some stress.

System layer: Mom has practical experience of how restaurants operate coming from summers she spent working in a diner. Pop is handy with tools, so he can set up and maintain restaurant equipment. The policies of the town are favorable to small businesses. The demographics of the town include a number of busy families with children who form a reliable customer base for the pizzeria. As the pace of economic recovery picks up, townspeople have more money and less time, so they frequent restaurants and order takeout more frequently. The restaurant maintains good connections with local suppliers, and Mom and Pop are proud of the high-quality and affordable dining experience they can offer. However, they are extremely busy.

Worldview layer: Pop values self-reliance and self-cultivation. For him, the worth of a person is determined not by possessions, external circumstances, or social status, but by character and accomplishments. He believes that every person has an inner purpose and that the surest way to be happy and useful to society is to follow one’s inner voice and encourage others to do the same. Mom values relationships and community. Her goal in life is to make the world a better place by bringing people together and slowing down the pace of life at least long enough to let neighbors chat and get to know each other. Pop, inspired by historical figures like Thoreau, sees living “off-grid” as an ideal: a way to be independent from modern civilization, and more in touch with nature. It can be hard for him to reconcile his community spirit with his individualism. Mom, on the other hand, envisions an ideal community where healthy relationships are facilitated over good meals. She sees the restaurant as a way to build relationships with diners and others in the food supply chain and local community.

Myth layer: Pop looks up to Thoreau and Emerson as personal heroes, and knows Walden and Self-Reliance backwards and forwards. Mom looks back to childhood memories of parents who loved cooking together and her memories evoke an age of innocence. For her, the circle is a powerful symbol of wholeness and community: when she brings a pizza to children at the round tables of the restaurant, she feels like a mystagogue initiating the next generation. They share some of this information with a wise counsellor, who they meet in a consulting room filled with lovely plants. Together, they put together a strategy that helps them to respond to the circumstances that have evolved. They decide to close the shop Monday through Wednesday, to spend time away from the business. They engage with hobbies like writing, woodwork, and painting, and they tend their garden together. Thursday through Sunday, they resolidify their intention to make their work together a meditation on love. They develop new ideas, related to food and otherwise. Boosted by their time off, they prepare more innovative meals and, while the restaurant remains affordable, they garner enthusiastic crit from foodies.

Discussion 3: The Future of Peeragogy

In this final week, we invite respondents to work with facilitator Bryan Alexander to develop themes and scenarios that can guide us in shaping the future of peeragogy.

Discussions (60 min):

  • Chaired Q&A with invited respondents (like a mini Future Trends Forum)
  • Respondents should agree to attend the previous 2 sessions, so that they will have context.
  • Collaborative scenario planning:
  • How to take peeragogy to the next level both inside and outside educational institutions?

Missions going forward, should you choose to accept

  • How do you want to put peeragogy in action?

  • Do you want to get involved with the Peeragogy project?

  • Write content for or edit the handbook

  • Sign up to be part of a longer course on peeragogy?

  • Run your own course?

  • Contribute to new and improved software?

  • Or take what you learned and apply it to a specific project of your own?

  • Use it at your day job?

  • Edit Wikipedia?

  • Join a FreeLibreOpen Source Software (FLOSS) project?

  • Help curate public domain resources?

  • Work together with people in your community?

  • Something else?

  • Either way, we hope we’ll be able to stay in touch with you! (And feel free to keep discussing your progress with peeragogy on the mailing list!)

  • If there is sufficient interest do we want to start a forum?

Workshop 3: How to edit the Peeragogy Handbook (Facilitators: Corneli and Pierce)

This workshop will bring newcomers up to speed with the tools we use to edit the Peeragogy Handbook. The tools are called Emacs, Org Mode, and Git. You don’t need to have prior experience with them: we will teach you everything you need to know in one hour. It is entirely acceptable to do peeragogy or to contribute to the Peeragogy project without using any of the tools described here. One of our guidelines in the project is that

Newcomers should be easily able to jump into the project and start contributing using tools and methods that are familiar to them.

So, if there are other tools you like better, feel free to use those instead! The reason we teach these tools is that we like them, and we also think that it sets a good standard for others: if you like using other tools, please develop a one hour workshop that teaches people how to use them!

15 minutes: Emacs

‘Emacs’ stands for Editor Macros, and it is the name of a computer program that you can use to write letters, code, or an entire book. We’re using Emacs along with other free software tools to edit the mainline version of the Peeragogy Handbook (4th Ed.).

15 minutes: Org Mode

Org mode is a ‘mode’ of Emacs that is used for organising things! You can use it to organise things into an outline, or into an agenda, or into a wiki --- and probably in some other ways that I forgot.

“Those who love peace must learn to organize as effectively as those who love war.” --- Martin Luther King Jr.

15 minutes: Git + Github

We’ll teach you everything you need to know about Git and Github to edit a copy of the Peeragogy Handbook and submit a “pull request”

15 minutes: Putting it all together

Working in small groups you’ll write up a short description of what you learned and submit it to the Handbook editors, along with a copyright waiver to allow inclusion of the material in future editions of the Handbook.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS, CONCLUSIONS

  • This course has covered peer learning and peer production, using the methods of peer learning and peer production.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank colleagues in the peeragogy project for discussions and contributed materials.

REFERENCES

Week 1 (pp. 1-35 of course pack)

Main texts:

Toward peeragogy[fn:: https://clalliance.org/blog/toward-peeragogy/]

‘Peer learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education[fn:: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075070500249138]

Community Guidelines[fn:: https://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/peeragogy-handbook/Week-of-Mon-20201130/000001.html]

Week 2 (pp. 36-72 of course pack)

Main text:

Week 3 (pp. 73-146 of course pack)

Main texts:

Additional readings

⚡ Unpeeragogy

Decostruzione: Syllabus 2021

⏱ 1 min unpeeragogydecostruzioneanti-pattern

Questo è lo spazio per la controparte Unpeeragogy di “Syllabus 2021”. Qui la teoria viene smontata, il pattern viene decostruito, e la realtà operativa prende il sopravvento.

Failure Pattern: L’Applicazione Meccanica Prendere un pattern teorico e applicarlo senza contesto è la ricetta per il fallimento. I manuali di peeragogy insegnano strumenti, ma non insegnano a leggere il terreno. Il risultato? Gruppi che seguono il manuale alla lettera e si chiedono perché non funziona.

Agente Perturbatore: “Avete copiato il pattern, ma non avete capito perché funziona. O se funziona per voi. Copiare senza capire non è peer learning, è catechismo. Leggete meno manuali e guardate di più il vostro gruppo.”

💬 Discussione: Decostruzione: Syllabus 2021

Questa discussione è ancorata al piano della realtà operativa. Niente teoria — solo esperienze, fallimenti, e verità scomode.

💬 Le discussioni sono attive su GitHub Discussions.

Disponibile quando deployato su un dominio pubblico con Giscus configurato.