Peeragogy Monthly Wrap: 2019-03

You’re reading the summary of our first meeting of a series conducted in Q1 and Q2. Our fun work included reviewing each other’s blog posts, introducing a newcomer to the project, revising an abstract, and hearing how Nepalese peers help one another!

Following the vernal equinox we held four meetings discussing peeragogy (check out our latest Peeragogy Handbook to learn more! There is also an earlier version of the Handbook on Wikibooks), which is our way to describe how peer learning and production work. In an effort to drink our own champagne, we’re implementing our wrapper pattern (see Peeragogy Wrapper Pattern description in the Peeragogy Handbook) by creating this meeting artifact you’re now reading: “Someone involved with the project should regularly create a wrap-up summary, distinct from other project communications, that makes current activities comprehensible to people who may not have been following all of the details.”

If you have any questions about these notes and/or the project in general, dear reader (this is an old technique in fiction where the author directly address the reader, which we’re using to make this a conversation! We want to know what you think!! Cliff Notes has a nice write up about how the technique was used in Adam Bede. “The technique, then, is first of all a convention. Eliot pretends throughout that Adam Bede is a true story. She takes the pose of one who is merely recording events which she has heard recounted. … The ‘dear reader’ technique also serves some practical functions. Because the author pretends to be ‘outside’ her own story, she is free to comment in her own voice upon the characters and events she creates.”), please reach out by emailing peeragogy@googlegroups.com!

March Meeting

When we last met in December, we defined some 2019 first quarter goals:

Write a blog post (no more than three paragraphs) on a learning topic they find interesting and relate it to peeragogy

And/or if you don’t have time to write, you can proofread,

Meet again in March to share work and outline next steps, and

Keep in touch via our public email group.

Aside from the fact that some of our writings exceed three paragraphs, I feel like we made good progress towards our Q1 goals. Lisa published a Medium blog post “Peeragogy: An Introduction (draft)” (later she put out a revised PDF version), Joe wrote a draft of a new article on our PubPub (it’s a tool for collaborative writing) instance, I compiled a submission to the Anticipation conference (“Anticipation 2019 is a unique, radically interdisciplinary forum for exploring how ideas of the future inform action in the present. It brings together researchers, policy makers, scholars and practitioners to push forward thinking on issues ranging from modelling, temporality and the present to the design, ethics and power of the future. This conference includes attention to design amongst other domains.”), we met in March, and we sent some emails to the public group (including introducing a newcomer to our fun world – Joe welcomed him by implementing our newcomer pattern in our Google Group).

During that March meeting our discussion topics included:

Siblings

Paola’s research and exciting upcoming presentation

Simplifying buddhism and applying it to modern times (similar books read by Joe & Lisa)

Quote about time for change

Community Organizers: animal management advocates ManuMitra (the group has a Facebook page and this description is from a Global Alliance for Rabies Control article: “It was a risk to design a project which hinges entirely on the community. But we found no shortage of local people willing to work voluntarily for street dogs. Even (or perhaps especially) in the most underprivileged communities, there are individuals who resolve human-dog conflict or unofficially act as a font of knowledge on dogs. They are the experts in their local dogs and local humans, and they are permanent residents. It would be inappropriate for us to come and attempt to do their job – the only question we should ask is, ‘how can we help these people?’” queried Basanta Gautam, ManuMitra’s community coordinator) in Nepal being more helpful for accomplishing dog management than traditional hierarchical aid organizations
Picture of dog in Boudhanath, Nepal in 2016.

The community organization chat reminded us of the community lifting itself up by its bootstraps story we quoted in our first paragogy paper (Corneli, J. and Danoff, C. 2011. Paragogy. Proceedings of the 6th Open Knowledge Conference. “Paragogy is a theory of peer learning: we endeavor to say how it works, and how it works best. This paper outlines paragogy’s contemporary relevance and expounds its principles, showing their connections to other theories. We present an extended example of paragogy in practice, where we use it to evaluate our experiences working at the Peer 2 Peer University (P2PU).”):

A. T. Ariyaratne’s essay on Rural Self Help, one of the foundational writings of the Sarvodaya Shramadana movement in Sri Lanka 6, begins:

“Nobody needs to teach rural communities about ‘group effort’ and ‘self-help’. […] The real question, therefore, is to examine what are the constraints that exist inhibiting the expression of their group effort and self-help qualities designed to improve food and nutrition levels, clothing,shelter, health, sanitation, education and cultural life?”

We approach peer learning in a similar spirit: it is something we all know how to do, but can’t always do well. Intuitively, there are bound to be difficulties for a group of peers studying a subject together, outside a traditional classroom or without a teacher. Indeed, peer learning is different from other forms of group effort, the proverbial “barn raising” for example, in which the persons involved can be presumed to know how to build barns – or at least to know someone who knows, and stand ready to take orders.

Coming out of the meeting, we defined some action items:

Meet in April

Review manuscript in progress doc and add links to more work

Collect success stories

Licensing of this Resource

This work has been released into the public domain by its author, Charlie Danoff. This applies worldwide. In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so: Charlie Danoff grants anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

This file is licensed under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal waiver. The author of this work has dedicated it to the public by waiving all of his or her rights to the work under copyright law and all related or neighboring legal rights he or she had in the work, to the extent allowable by law. Legal Code