Collaborative Lesson Planning

Looking at the current course another way: The activities I had in mind are for people to

"Tell us about something you learned."

or

"Tell us about something you're having difficulty with."

I wonder if it is possible to break those activities down into smaller steps?

I did introduce people to some of the *mathematics learning* techniques that have worked for me in the past, but I'm a little less clear on the techniques that have made it possible for me to speak up in various learning contexts. I've always assumed it was "just part of my personality". But, upon reflection, that seems like a pretty major blindspot!

But maybe I should just take advantage of this and post more to the group along those lines myself, rather than posting in the capacity of "cat-herder" and nudging people to do things.

OK, here is a quick writeup on "paragogy", basically defined in contrast with andragogy.

http://metameso.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/pilot

The next question would be: how to design a course or "lesson" that embodies paragogic principles.

Hi Charlie:

and thanks for pinging me :). I've been thinking about paragogy a lot over the last week, corresponding with various people, and I definitely owe you a response and update on where this is at for me.

I think your understanding of "paragogy versus andragogy" is very clear and it sums up the idea quite well. It could be fleshed out with various examples or expansions, but let's keep your statement, "andragogy is more about a self-motivated individual learning independently in a room and paragogy is more about groups of motivated people learning together" in mind as the core definition. Cool...

A couple of these extensions or expansions:

(1) Paragogy (etymologically, "leading aside") seems like a good way to describe learning that includes a lot of "break-out group" sort of stuff. Instead of there being one direction that everyone, or indeed anyone, is supposed to get to, paragogy is OK with, even endorses, non-linear thinking and sidetracking. This also works in the peer-guided sense of things, because the more I listen to different people, the more different directions come in to *play* (pun intended) -- even if I have one "main" direction in mind.

(2) I'm inclined to *question* just how self-motivated and independent people really can be under various circumstances. My initial critique of andragogy basically is about power. Educators over students, or circumstances over everyone. A "direction" can embody a powerful premise, and I think it is always helpful to be able to step aside -- and in a peer-based context, one does that a lot! This doesn't mean that there is any problem with there being teachers or facilitators! Rather, it's an invitation for these people to examine the way power works in their classrooms, schools, and neighborhoods, etc. -- people are often learning *outside* of classrooms and schools in a very peer-like manner. Something to think about.

Just one more quick example: I think it's cool that our conversation can flow back and forth between a couple of different course spaces as well as personal email. It seems like a positive example of how "leading aside" can produce learning.

Best,
Joe

I've re-summed-up paragogy at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Arided/Paragogy. I also have a quite lengthy analysis of the DIY Math course at http://metameso.org/~joe/docs/probation-report-draft.pdf if anyone wants to take a look at it. (From page 11 to page 21 of that document.)

I still need to make some actual *lesson plan*. I do have some ideas in mind based on my DIY Math experiences and I think I just need to bang them out. I'll plan to post this stuff on Wikiversity (at least the first drafts will go there).