# data[].attributes.body
HEUTAGOGY is the self-determined learning, which is an extension of andragogy and pedagogy method of learning. In Heutagogy, the learner is the major agent in the acquisition of knowledge and the proper person to initiate the learning process. The key word most suitable to explain heutagogy would be learning through self-experienced.

https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/complicity/article/view/8766/7086

PARAGOGY on the other hand, the learner despite being the major agent in the learning process, he/she is also a contributor to other major learners in their respective group. It is heutagogical method of learning on an organozational level. The key word in paragogical method of learning is peer-produced educational process. The involvement of the peers of the major learner also as the major learners would create a participatory  educational atmosphere among them.

http://metameso.org/~joe/docs/paragogical-praxis.pdf

Regards,
A. Mu'iz

# data[].attributes.body
Similarities
- Learning centered
- Involve active learning

Differences
1. Heutagogy - Self determined learning
Paragogy - Peer learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Created using PowToon -- Free sign up at http://www.powtoon.com/youtube/ -- Create animated videos and animated presentations for free. PowToon is a free tool that allows you to develop cool animated clips and animated presentations for your website, office meeting, sales pitch, nonprofit fundraiser, product launch, video resume, or anything else you could use an animated explainer video.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy : Theory of self determined learning
Paragogy: Theory of peer to peer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642

Now this..... Not this.
Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net
I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago. They are related, relatively new theories about how we learn that align well with, perhaps have emerged from, the age of connected learning and social media.

What is it?
The study or theory of self-determined learning, i.e. learning occurs when the learner is ready and not when the teacher expects or intends it.
The term was originally used by Hase and Kenyon (2000).

The study or theory of peer to peer learning (also peeragogy, peertagogy). The term paragogy is attributed to Corneli and Danoff (2011).
The term refers to how students learn in formal educational settings as well as how adults in the workplace and in higher ed are expected to have and use multi-media and web-based tools such as document sharing, blogging, tweeting, video and image making and sharing, as ways to capture and share information with peers.

How do they work?
Heutagogy and paragogy have the following in common:

1. Learning is decentralized

2. Learning is non-linear

3. Learning is self-determined

4. Learning is peer-centered

5. Meta-focus or double loop learning-i.e. learning how to learn

As theories of how something works, they provide us a model to better understand how our learning has changed with and drives changes in current technology and tools-social media, mobile learning and other ways we connect over the internet and ethernet. They also help us predict how learning may continue to change (such as the increasing legitimacy of informal learning), and better identify and plan for learning in all settings that takes full advantage of that which people do naturally.

Of note is an additional paragogical principal that emphasizes the availability of peer feedback that would otherwise not have been available. Paragogy.net is a great resource for more information.

Who's doing it?
Children, young adults and adults engaged in formal and informal learning across the globe. Examples include MOOCs, flipped classrooms, hybrid or online learning, connected learning. Wikipedia, YouTube, self-publishing books, crowd sourcing solutions, crowd-sourcing science (i.e. mapping gut bacteria of the world based on fecal samples collected from citizen volunteers) are all examples of heutagogy and paragogy.

Regarding the issue of peer feedback:think about how businesses like Uber, ebay, Yelp (or any site or service that channels or depends upon customer reviews for continued business) works. Customer reviews and feedback inform future customers about decisions to purchase or not. Websites rank products and services based upon customer ratings. Businesses adjust service and products to better meet customer needs based on this feedback. Peer feedback leading to learning and change at its best!

Why is it significant?
Andragogy and pedagogy have relevancy, but are not in step with how we communicate and learn now. Until these newer theories are embraced in our formal learning programs (work, school, educational and training programs), I believe we will be much less effective as learning facilitators. Institutions, organizations and bureaucracies will be increasingly challenged to demonstrate their benefits, relevancy and how they meet the changing needs of savvy learners and consumers. Institutions are by their very nature slow to change.

Not only does this shift learning completely to focus on the individual, it drives the "learner as consumer" model as well.

What are the downsides?
I read a great article about the true benefit of higher education ( What College is Good for). College offers opportunities to develop critical thinking skills and healthy life long learning habits. These things depend upon the purposeful meeting of teacher and student in a community of inquiry. Heutagogy and paragogy place this type of interaction on the fringe and we are in danger of losing the benefits of this type of learning-deep thinking that makes us better, that we need to be coached to do because they are hard for us to do on our own.

Where is it going?
Heutagogy and paragogy are here to stay. They are natural extensions of andragogy and are, simultaneously, nothing new (consider how indigenous groups learn as collectives). One radical idea is in how these theories and practices of learning will challenge institutions. An analogy (provided by the author of my source article) between education and medicine sheds light: expert-driven (teacher, doctor) instruction is beneficial for incidental/critical intervention (acute medical or educational needs) but self-determined, decentralized, dispersed, non-linear methods are best suited for chronic (health, learning) management.

What are the implications for adult learning?
It's time for expansion of theory beyond andragogy. Research that informs, tests and refines these theoretical models can better inform educational institution and corporate practice and understanding. I read more and more about leveraging informal learning at work in particular, but we are slow to change. People are learning whether we are part of the process or not!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Things to Know about Heutagogy and Paragogy | AussieFacilitator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642 Now this..... Not this. Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago.

# data[].attributes.headline
“Heutagogy is the study of self-determined learning … It is also an attempt to challenge some ideas about teaching and learning that still prevail in teacher centred learning and the need for, as Bill Ford (1997) eloquently puts it 'knowledge sharing' rather than 'knowledge hoarding'.

# data[].attributes.subject
“Heutagogy is the study of self-determined learning … It is also an attempt to challenge some ideas about teaching and learning that still prevail in teacher centred learning and the need for, as Bill Ford (1997) eloquently puts it 'knowledge sharing' rather than 'knowledge hoarding'.

# data[].attributes.body
source:https://heutagogycop.wordpress.com/history-of-heutagogy/

paragogy is a peer-to-peer centered learning process
https://educateria.com/2014/01/05/paragogy-and-heutagogy/

Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear.
Both are well-suited for generation that attached and relied too much on technology where they can self-learn, globalize the knowledge without boundry as a life-long learning

# data[].attributes.body
Paragogy is among the most effective methods of learning as it allows learners to communicate and interact with one another
to obtain a desired study outcome with the support of trainers.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy: self-determined learning
Paragogy: peer to peer learning

Similarities: both learning are self-determined, peer-led, decentered and non-linear, also extend traditional andragogy and adult learning framework emphasizing meta learning or learning how to learn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy vs Paragogy (Peeragogy)

Similarities:
1. Centralized learning
2. Non-linear learning
3. Self-determined learning'
4. Peer-centered learning'
5. Double loop / Meta-focus learning (learning how to learn)

Differences:
Peeragogy focuses on peer to peer learning where as heutagogy is more on individual (self) learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains which are instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - heutagogy is a learning as self-determined and non-linear while paragogy is a peer-to-peer and decentred learning. Both have important implications for practice in the 21st Century.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy = self-determined learning
Paragogy = peer to peer learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Technology in Education column is written by one of our CNA Centennial 100 Award Winners, Dr. Sandra Bassendowski, who is a Professor at the University of Saskatchewan. Sandra recognized a need, and offered to write this important feature for the CJNI ñ this column is focused on how technology can be used in nursing education and by nurses in general. Sandra has been recognized by the Canadian Nursesí Association, as well as the Saskatchewan Registered Nurses Association and the University of Saskatchewan for her inspiring, dedicated work in her educational practice.

COLUMN

I follow the postings on Steve Wheeler's blog and read a posting where the word "paragogy" was mentioned and it immediately sparked my interest. I was not familiar with the term so decided to Google it and see what was on the web about this concept. So in an article written by Herlo (2014), the author suggests that "Paragogy addresses the challenge of peer-producing a useful and supportive context for self-directed learning, based on connectivism between peers in the digital era." The article goes on to state that paragogy deals with analyzing and co-creating the educational environment as a whole by the peers, sharing their learning situations and experiences, and gaining from information technology. This article then led me to information about authors Corneli and Danoff who presented on this topic in 2011 in Berlin. I find it interesting that they mention that paragogy was developed by adapting Knowles' principles of andragogy. For the last two decades, the principles of andragogy seemed to have gone out of style for the newer concept of pedagogy! These authors suggest that each of Knowles's principles are adjusted to the peer-based learning context by turning the original by 90°. So - the challenge is now to become familiar with the concept/theory of paragogy and see how it can support student learning in a different way.

As educators we know that students "scaffold and extend each other's knowledge gain"... which becomes important with diminishing power differentials between experts and novices due to these emerging forms of peer learning and knowledge production ( Boulos, Giustini, & Wheeler, 2016). This paragogical theory suggests that online networks are sufficiently developed to support user-generated content that can be shared freely and widely (Boulos, Giustini, & Wheeler). The photo that I have included with this posting of my classroom gives me the sense of the importance of peer learning- I believe students need to make these blended and seamless connections and links with each other in order to be successful in their nursing programs. These connections provide the overlapping support when things are not going as smoothly as planned; these connections can help students get through a study week, receive a poor grade, or just deal with general fatigue and disappointment. Peers can assist each other to manage, organize, and review course and program content. How will you consider paragogy in your teaching and learning?

PHOTO CREDIT:

Photograph: Canadian Nurses Association with permission: Teckle's Photography

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Technology in Education column is written by one of our CNA Centennial 100 Award Winners, Dr. Sandra Bassendowski, who is a Professor at the University of Saskatchewan. Sandra recognized a need, and offered to write this important feature for the CJNI ñ this column is focused on how technology can be used in nursing education and by nurses in general.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy = self-directed
Paragogy= decentred learning (peer to peer)

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy: Self determined learning
Paragogy : Peer to peer and decentered learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Similarties of Heutagogy And Paragogy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
peeragogy =

# data[].attributes.body
sim - self-motivated
diff - paragogy might a group based instead individual based of heuta.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is self determined learning method and Paragogy is a method of sharing in learning

# data[].attributes.body
heutagogy is self-determined learning. Paragogy is peer-to-peer and decentred learning
The similarities of these two approach  offer models of learning that are self-determined, peer-led, decentred and non-linear.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is learners can go beyond problem solving enabling pro-activity
Paragogy is creating wisdom starting from data,information and knowledge. Is creating challenge environment as a whole by the peers. Share leaning and experience which benefit information technology.

# data[].attributes.body
The differences can be look at the dependency of the learners, from dependent, independent to interdependent.
http://www.teachthought.com/pedagogy/a-primer-in-heutagogy-and-self-directed-learning/

# data[].attributes.body
heutagogy is a student centered learning process in which it is facilitated by a facilitator. paragogy is a peer-to-peer learning process, where the information exchange is occurring between two individuals with different backgrounds using new media, such as online chatting, video call, youtube, etc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642

Now this..... Not this.
Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net
I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago. They are related, relatively new theories about how we learn that align well with, perhaps have emerged from, the age of connected learning and social media.

What is it?
The study or theory of self-determined learning, i.e. learning occurs when the learner is ready and not when the teacher expects or intends it.
The term was originally used by Hase and Kenyon (2000).

The study or theory of peer to peer learning (also peeragogy, peertagogy). The term paragogy is attributed to Corneli and Danoff (2011).
The term refers to how students learn in formal educational settings as well as how adults in the workplace and in higher ed are expected to have and use multi-media and web-based tools such as document sharing, blogging, tweeting, video and image making and sharing, as ways to capture and share information with peers.

How do they work?
Heutagogy and paragogy have the following in common:

1. Learning is decentralized

2. Learning is non-linear

3. Learning is self-determined

4. Learning is peer-centered

5. Meta-focus or double loop learning-i.e. learning how to learn

As theories of how something works, they provide us a model to better understand how our learning has changed with and drives changes in current technology and tools-social media, mobile learning and other ways we connect over the internet and ethernet. They also help us predict how learning may continue to change (such as the increasing legitimacy of informal learning), and better identify and plan for learning in all settings that takes full advantage of that which people do naturally.

Of note is an additional paragogical principal that emphasizes the availability of peer feedback that would otherwise not have been available. Paragogy.net is a great resource for more information.

Who's doing it?
Children, young adults and adults engaged in formal and informal learning across the globe. Examples include MOOCs, flipped classrooms, hybrid or online learning, connected learning. Wikipedia, YouTube, self-publishing books, crowd sourcing solutions, crowd-sourcing science (i.e. mapping gut bacteria of the world based on fecal samples collected from citizen volunteers) are all examples of heutagogy and paragogy.

Regarding the issue of peer feedback:think about how businesses like Uber, ebay, Yelp (or any site or service that channels or depends upon customer reviews for continued business) works. Customer reviews and feedback inform future customers about decisions to purchase or not. Websites rank products and services based upon customer ratings. Businesses adjust service and products to better meet customer needs based on this feedback. Peer feedback leading to learning and change at its best!

Why is it significant?
Andragogy and pedagogy have relevancy, but are not in step with how we communicate and learn now. Until these newer theories are embraced in our formal learning programs (work, school, educational and training programs), I believe we will be much less effective as learning facilitators. Institutions, organizations and bureaucracies will be increasingly challenged to demonstrate their benefits, relevancy and how they meet the changing needs of savvy learners and consumers. Institutions are by their very nature slow to change.

Not only does this shift learning completely to focus on the individual, it drives the "learner as consumer" model as well.

What are the downsides?
I read a great article about the true benefit of higher education ( What College is Good for). College offers opportunities to develop critical thinking skills and healthy life long learning habits. These things depend upon the purposeful meeting of teacher and student in a community of inquiry. Heutagogy and paragogy place this type of interaction on the fringe and we are in danger of losing the benefits of this type of learning-deep thinking that makes us better, that we need to be coached to do because they are hard for us to do on our own.

Where is it going?
Heutagogy and paragogy are here to stay. They are natural extensions of andragogy and are, simultaneously, nothing new (consider how indigenous groups learn as collectives). One radical idea is in how these theories and practices of learning will challenge institutions. An analogy (provided by the author of my source article) between education and medicine sheds light: expert-driven (teacher, doctor) instruction is beneficial for incidental/critical intervention (acute medical or educational needs) but self-determined, decentralized, dispersed, non-linear methods are best suited for chronic (health, learning) management.

What are the implications for adult learning?
It's time for expansion of theory beyond andragogy. Research that informs, tests and refines these theoretical models can better inform educational institution and corporate practice and understanding. I read more and more about leveraging informal learning at work in particular, but we are slow to change. People are learning whether we are part of the process or not!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Things to Know about Heutagogy and Paragogy | AussieFacilitator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642 Now this..... Not this. Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is self determing learning while paragogy is peer to peer learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy - self determined learning , focused on developing capabilities., double loop learning
Paragogy - peer to peer based learning,
similarities  : emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy - self-directed learning
Paragogy - peer-based learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Incorporating Heutagogy into theology education

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy : Self-determined learning

# data[].attributes.body
heuta-self determine learning
para-peer to peer learning

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is the process of learning that is determined by oneself while peeragogy is determined not only by the learner but also the people around him/her a.k.a peers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Comments on Heutagogy and Lifelong Learning: A Review of Heutagogical Practice and Self-Determined Learning (Lisa Marie Bisschke) ( IRRODL)

Andragogy as adult education, in the Netherlands mostly is understood as language learning for immigrants, teaching reading and writing for adults, education for people at the bottom of the social scale. Is heutagogy the education for the high end of the social/educational scale?

Heutogogy the way the teacher makes the teacher redundant. "the removal of the educator makes the concept of heutagogy impractical in a credentialing institution"

Heutagogy and peer-agogy, the autonomous learner needs peers for help and guidance. Key affordances of social media - connectivity with others, information discovery and sharing are also affordances that support self-determind learning activities.

Heutagogy as pedagogy 2.0.

Collaborative learning is also a critical component of the heutagogical classroom. (a heutagogical classroom isn't that a paradox?)

Lifelong learning and assessment: assessment as an end to a learning process is contrary to lifelong learning. Does assessment fit into the framework of lifelong learning?

I like this article of Lisa Marie Blaschke. Good introduction to heutagogy, makes one think.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Heutagogy #change11 andragogy lifelong learning e-learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Comments on Heutagogy and Lifelong Learning: A Review of Heutagogical Practice and Self-Determined Learning (Lisa Marie Bisschke) (IRRODL) Andragogy as adult education, in the Netherlands mostly is understood as language learning for immigrants, teaching reading and writing for adults, education for people at the bottom of the social scale.

# data[].attributes.body
Paragogy is one of the most effective ways in learning as it is sought to find answers based on shared information among peers.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy self-determined l

# data[].attributes.body
similarity:
heutagogy and paragogy was developed by Prof Dato' Dr. Mohamed Amin Embi from UKM.
Difference:
heutagogy: self directed learning
paragogy: peer to peer and decentred learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Paragogy: peer to peer learning
Similarities: offer models of learning that are self determined, peer-led, decentered and non-linear. focus on learning how to learn with slight inclusion of andragogy and adult learning framework

# data[].attributes.body
pedagogy - instructor is the centre-children's learning 👩🏻‍🏫+👦🏻👧🏻
heutagogy- self determined-self directed-can be anywhere...anytime...🖥+📱+connection

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is self-determined learning
Paragogy is peer-to-peer determined learning

Both is non-linear, decentred, peer-led and self-determined. they emphasis on learning how to learn.

source: https://educateria.com/2014/01/05/paragogy-and-heutagogy/

# data[].attributes.body
similarities:-
-both is active learning
-

differences:-
peeragogy= This type of learning is relevant to anyone who wants to do active learning together with others in a relatively non-hierarchical setting.
heutagogy= is self-determined learning. did not involved active learning with others

# data[].attributes.body
Similarities:
offer models of learning that are self-determined, peer-led, decentered and non-linear.

Differences:

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy : The study or theory of self-determined learning.
Paragogy : The study or theory of peer to peer learning and decentred learning.

https://rampages.us/pmcfarline/2015/06/30/7-things-to-know-about-heutagogy-and-paragogy/

https://educateria.com/2014/01/05/paragogy-and-heutagogy/

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is self determined learning while paragogy is is new theory is educational sciences where it is a theory of peer learning. It shows the information and people being so easy and so widespread and that we make connection with people who can help us manage, organised and disseminate and make scene of the resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642

Now this..... Not this.
Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net
I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago. They are related, relatively new theories about how we learn that align well with, perhaps have emerged from, the age of connected learning and social media.

What is it?
The study or theory of self-determined learning, i.e. learning occurs when the learner is ready and not when the teacher expects or intends it.
The term was originally used by Hase and Kenyon (2000).

The study or theory of peer to peer learning (also peeragogy, peertagogy). The term paragogy is attributed to Corneli and Danoff (2011).
The term refers to how students learn in formal educational settings as well as how adults in the workplace and in higher ed are expected to have and use multi-media and web-based tools such as document sharing, blogging, tweeting, video and image making and sharing, as ways to capture and share information with peers.

How do they work?
Heutagogy and paragogy have the following in common:

1. Learning is decentralized

2. Learning is non-linear

3. Learning is self-determined

4. Learning is peer-centered

5. Meta-focus or double loop learning-i.e. learning how to learn

As theories of how something works, they provide us a model to better understand how our learning has changed with and drives changes in current technology and tools-social media, mobile learning and other ways we connect over the internet and ethernet. They also help us predict how learning may continue to change (such as the increasing legitimacy of informal learning), and better identify and plan for learning in all settings that takes full advantage of that which people do naturally.

Of note is an additional paragogical principal that emphasizes the availability of peer feedback that would otherwise not have been available. Paragogy.net is a great resource for more information.

Who's doing it?
Children, young adults and adults engaged in formal and informal learning across the globe. Examples include MOOCs, flipped classrooms, hybrid or online learning, connected learning. Wikipedia, YouTube, self-publishing books, crowd sourcing solutions, crowd-sourcing science (i.e. mapping gut bacteria of the world based on fecal samples collected from citizen volunteers) are all examples of heutagogy and paragogy.

Regarding the issue of peer feedback:think about how businesses like Uber, ebay, Yelp (or any site or service that channels or depends upon customer reviews for continued business) works. Customer reviews and feedback inform future customers about decisions to purchase or not. Websites rank products and services based upon customer ratings. Businesses adjust service and products to better meet customer needs based on this feedback. Peer feedback leading to learning and change at its best!

Why is it significant?
Andragogy and pedagogy have relevancy, but are not in step with how we communicate and learn now. Until these newer theories are embraced in our formal learning programs (work, school, educational and training programs), I believe we will be much less effective as learning facilitators. Institutions, organizations and bureaucracies will be increasingly challenged to demonstrate their benefits, relevancy and how they meet the changing needs of savvy learners and consumers. Institutions are by their very nature slow to change.

Not only does this shift learning completely to focus on the individual, it drives the "learner as consumer" model as well.

What are the downsides?
I read a great article about the true benefit of higher education ( What College is Good for). College offers opportunities to develop critical thinking skills and healthy life long learning habits. These things depend upon the purposeful meeting of teacher and student in a community of inquiry. Heutagogy and paragogy place this type of interaction on the fringe and we are in danger of losing the benefits of this type of learning-deep thinking that makes us better, that we need to be coached to do because they are hard for us to do on our own.

Where is it going?
Heutagogy and paragogy are here to stay. They are natural extensions of andragogy and are, simultaneously, nothing new (consider how indigenous groups learn as collectives). One radical idea is in how these theories and practices of learning will challenge institutions. An analogy (provided by the author of my source article) between education and medicine sheds light: expert-driven (teacher, doctor) instruction is beneficial for incidental/critical intervention (acute medical or educational needs) but self-determined, decentralized, dispersed, non-linear methods are best suited for chronic (health, learning) management.

What are the implications for adult learning?
It's time for expansion of theory beyond andragogy. Research that informs, tests and refines these theoretical models can better inform educational institution and corporate practice and understanding. I read more and more about leveraging informal learning at work in particular, but we are slow to change. People are learning whether we are part of the process or not!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Things to Know about Heutagogy and Paragogy | AussieFacilitator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642 Now this..... Not this. Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago.

# data[].attributes.body
https://educateria.com/2014/01/05/paragogy-and-heutagogy/

# data[].attributes.headline
heutagogy is student centered learning ang the lecturer will be the fasilitator.

# data[].attributes.subject
heutagogy is student centered learning ang the lecturer will be the fasilitator.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy: learning as self-determined and non-linear

Paragogy :peer-to-peer and decentred learning.
deals with a very important challenge, that of analyzing and co-creating the educational environment as a whole by the peers, which share their learning situations and experiences benefiting of information technology.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PARAGOGY. A NEW THEORY IN EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES | Herlo | Journal Plus Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PARAGOGY. A NEW THEORY IN EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is self learning while paragogy is peer learning. Both are active learning and is essential in meaningful learning. Both require minimal or no supervision.

# data[].attributes.body
*Heutagogy* happens when learning is done throught self-determined and non-linear while paragogy happens when peer and decentred learning takes place.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is a self-determined learning, where giving the learners autonomy in doing their tasks. As for the paragogy, is a peer-to-peer and decentred learning. Both of these methods offer models of learning that are self determined, peer lead, decentred and non-linear. These characteristic map onto social media applications, and democratization of knowledge and informations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy vs Paragogy / Peeragogy

Heutagogy is self-determined learning or simply said the learners wanted to learn. While Paragogy is peer to peer learning (i.e., involve students active learning in formal class as well as adults in workplace).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642

Now this..... Not this.
Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net
I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago. They are related, relatively new theories about how we learn that align well with, perhaps have emerged from, the age of connected learning and social media.

What is it?
The study or theory of self-determined learning, i.e. learning occurs when the learner is ready and not when the teacher expects or intends it.
The term was originally used by Hase and Kenyon (2000).

The study or theory of peer to peer learning (also peeragogy, peertagogy). The term paragogy is attributed to Corneli and Danoff (2011).
The term refers to how students learn in formal educational settings as well as how adults in the workplace and in higher ed are expected to have and use multi-media and web-based tools such as document sharing, blogging, tweeting, video and image making and sharing, as ways to capture and share information with peers.

How do they work?
Heutagogy and paragogy have the following in common:

1. Learning is decentralized

2. Learning is non-linear

3. Learning is self-determined

4. Learning is peer-centered

5. Meta-focus or double loop learning-i.e. learning how to learn

As theories of how something works, they provide us a model to better understand how our learning has changed with and drives changes in current technology and tools-social media, mobile learning and other ways we connect over the internet and ethernet. They also help us predict how learning may continue to change (such as the increasing legitimacy of informal learning), and better identify and plan for learning in all settings that takes full advantage of that which people do naturally.

Of note is an additional paragogical principal that emphasizes the availability of peer feedback that would otherwise not have been available. Paragogy.net is a great resource for more information.

Who's doing it?
Children, young adults and adults engaged in formal and informal learning across the globe. Examples include MOOCs, flipped classrooms, hybrid or online learning, connected learning. Wikipedia, YouTube, self-publishing books, crowd sourcing solutions, crowd-sourcing science (i.e. mapping gut bacteria of the world based on fecal samples collected from citizen volunteers) are all examples of heutagogy and paragogy.

Regarding the issue of peer feedback:think about how businesses like Uber, ebay, Yelp (or any site or service that channels or depends upon customer reviews for continued business) works. Customer reviews and feedback inform future customers about decisions to purchase or not. Websites rank products and services based upon customer ratings. Businesses adjust service and products to better meet customer needs based on this feedback. Peer feedback leading to learning and change at its best!

Why is it significant?
Andragogy and pedagogy have relevancy, but are not in step with how we communicate and learn now. Until these newer theories are embraced in our formal learning programs (work, school, educational and training programs), I believe we will be much less effective as learning facilitators. Institutions, organizations and bureaucracies will be increasingly challenged to demonstrate their benefits, relevancy and how they meet the changing needs of savvy learners and consumers. Institutions are by their very nature slow to change.

Not only does this shift learning completely to focus on the individual, it drives the "learner as consumer" model as well.

What are the downsides?
I read a great article about the true benefit of higher education ( What College is Good for). College offers opportunities to develop critical thinking skills and healthy life long learning habits. These things depend upon the purposeful meeting of teacher and student in a community of inquiry. Heutagogy and paragogy place this type of interaction on the fringe and we are in danger of losing the benefits of this type of learning-deep thinking that makes us better, that we need to be coached to do because they are hard for us to do on our own.

Where is it going?
Heutagogy and paragogy are here to stay. They are natural extensions of andragogy and are, simultaneously, nothing new (consider how indigenous groups learn as collectives). One radical idea is in how these theories and practices of learning will challenge institutions. An analogy (provided by the author of my source article) between education and medicine sheds light: expert-driven (teacher, doctor) instruction is beneficial for incidental/critical intervention (acute medical or educational needs) but self-determined, decentralized, dispersed, non-linear methods are best suited for chronic (health, learning) management.

What are the implications for adult learning?
It's time for expansion of theory beyond andragogy. Research that informs, tests and refines these theoretical models can better inform educational institution and corporate practice and understanding. I read more and more about leveraging informal learning at work in particular, but we are slow to change. People are learning whether we are part of the process or not!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Things to Know about Heutagogy and Paragogy | AussieFacilitator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Posted on 30. Jun, 2015 by Penny in ADLT642 Now this..... Not this. Resources: Global Citizen Digest Volume 2 Issue 2. Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy www.paragogy.net I read about heutagogy and paragogy for the first time a few years ago.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy VS Paragogy:

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy & Paragogy= models of learning that are 1) self-determined, 2) peer-led, 3) de-centered, 4) non-linear, 5) meta-focus/double loop learning. Peergogy utilizes feedbacks and more on co-learning. Heutagogy utilizes formal and informal global platforms such as MOOC but more self-directed.

# data[].attributes.body
Paragogy: peer-to-peer

# data[].attributes.body
Similarities:
Both are self learning and meant for adult learners (andragogy 2.0)

Differences:
Heutagogy is self-determined centered learning while paragogy is peer-to-peer and decentered learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
peergogy is a group of peer working together cooperatively
heutagogy is self directed/determined learning while paragogy is peer to peer and decentered learning

# data[].attributes.headline
Heutagogy "self-determined learning … It is also an attempt to challenge some ideas about teaching and learning that still prevail in teacher centred learning and the need for, as Bill Ford (1997) eloquently puts it ‘knowledge sharing’ rather than ‘knowledge hoarding’.

# data[].attributes.subject
Heutagogy "self-determined learning … It is also an attempt to challenge some ideas about teaching and learning that still prevail in teacher centred learning and the need for, as Bill Ford (1997) eloquently puts it ‘knowledge sharing’ rather than ‘knowledge hoarding’.

# data[].attributes.body
Paragogy - peer-to-peer and decentred learning

# data[].attributes.body
Paragogy and heutagogy is the new theory of instructional technology in which -  heutagogy (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and paragogy (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) – have important implications for practice in the 21st Century.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Incorporating Heutagogy into theology education

# data[].attributes.body
The differences between both techniques are heutagogy is self-determined learning approach whereas paragogy is peer-to-peer technique. Their similarities are both techniques are used for adult learners.
https://educateria.com/2014/01/05/paragogy-and-heutagogy/

# data[].attributes.headline
 Heutagogy - self-determined learning Paragogy- peer to peer learning. 

# data[].attributes.subject
 Heutagogy - self-determined learning Paragogy- peer to peer learning. 

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy - Self-determined learning that involved learners through collaborative and cooperative learning. Student-centered. Paragogy - peer-to-peer. Peer led approach. Educational practice in which learner interact with others to attain educational goals. Difference -> heutagogy more towards learner themselves put an effort to search upon one information. On the other hand paragogy, the information that one learner has, will be convey or share with other learners.

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy -  learning as self-determined and it its non linear.
Paragogy - also known as peeragogy. It is a peer-to-peer and decentered learning process.

This the link of the differentiation between paragogy and heutagogy:
https://educateria.com/2014/01/05/paragogy-and-heutagogy/

# data[].attributes.body
peeragogy is the newest learning approach in which students make maximum use of multimedia and web base tools in searching for information. also a peer to peer learning where information are shared collaboratively.
heutagogy students centered and self determined learning.
https://youtu.be/J2XCuMwKLzw

# data[].attributes.body
heutagogy is the self determined learning,
peeragogy is the  peer to peer and decentred learning.
similarities: the output will be same that can apply through holistic approach to develop learning capabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Incorporating Heutagogy into theology education

# data[].attributes.body
heutagogy is a self determined learning while paragogy is based on peer learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PARAGOGY. A NEW THEORY IN EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES | Herlo | Journal Plus Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PARAGOGY. A NEW THEORY IN EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

# data[].attributes.body
While heutagogy and paragogy are both self-determined and focuse more the contents, they differs in the sense that paragogy relies on peer as support tools for the learning process

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
heutagogy- student learn by themselves
paragogy peer to peer learning (decentred learning)
both are self determined, peer-led, decentered and non linear. However, heutagogy, student manage their own learning. Although teacher act as facilitator that provide learning

# data[].attributes.body
Paragogy and Heutagogy - Heutagogy - learning as self-determined and non-linear whilst paragogy - is peer-to-peer and decentred learning - have important implications for practice in 21st Century. Both represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist , critical and adult learning theory. Both offers models of learning that are self-determined, peer-lead, and decentred and non-linear.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in education theory for a digital world
This article is abbreviated from:
Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14.
Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage with others, whether as instructor or student. Traditional theoretical frameworks can be broadly grouped into four domains: instructivism, critical theory, constructivist approaches and andragogy (or adult learning). However Web 2.0, characterized by many-to-many, decentred and non-linear networking and communication, has given rise to corresponding advances in conceptualizing teaching and learning in the global classroom. Emerging frameworks - (learning as self-determined and non-linear) and (peer-to-peer and decentred learning) - have important implications for practice in the 21 st Century.

Education theory has seen a trajectory from teacher-centred (instructivism) to learner-centred approaches (constructivism and andragogy), incorporating broader contextual issues and dynamics of power, privilege and community (critical pedagogy). However, these theories were all developed prior to the rise and ubiquity of Web 2.0 and social media. Integrating emerging models can extend constructivist, critical and andragogical frameworks towards a kind of "andragogy 2.0".

Heutagogy and paragogy represent potentially useful extensions of constructivist, critical and adult learning theories; that is, androgogy 2.0. Both heutagogy and paragogy offer models of learning that are (1) self-determined, (2) peer-led, (3) decentred and (4) non-linear. These characteristics map onto social media applications and the democratization of knowledge and information. Heutagogical and paragogical approaches also extend traditional andragogical and adult learning frameworks through their emphasis on meta learning, or learning how to learn.

Andragogy, as self- directed learning focused on competency development, is reconceptualized in heutagogy as self- determined learning focused on developing capabilities. As our rapidly-changing occupational terrains continuously advance and expand workforce competency needs, today's workforce requires lifelong learners who are both competent and capable. No post-secondary program of study can ever really prepare students with all of the knowledge and skills needed (competencies); rather, it is one's capability in determining what knowledge and skills need continuous development, and how to access/master them (capabilities). The skills associated with locating and interrogating information to inform decision-making, what we might call " knowledge curators ", are paramount in a knowledge economy.

This in turn implies access to knowledge and skills in a non-linear fashion by today's " hyperlearners" (derived from the hypertextuality of the web, where information is hyperlinked with no beginning-, middle- or end-point). The process of knowledge construction is itself non-linear, and non-linear curricula would mirror real-world knowledge retrieval and construction. Similarly, shifting from instructors and learners collaboratively co-creating curricula, towards a learner-directed approach, may better prepare learners with the skills needed for lifelong learning via personal learning networks (mapping onto autonomous digital communities).

Finally, heutagogy and paragogy address process over content - the "how" as opposed to the "what" - or meta-learning (learning how to learn). Through networked community and crowd-sourcing, "the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts". This is illustrated by the elegant solutions to complex problems yielded via crowd-sourced distributed networks. For example, in 2011 crowd-sourcing was used to successfully solve a protein structure (retroviral protease of the Mason-Pfizer monkey virus, the cause of an AIDS-like disease in monkeys) that had puzzled scientists for over a decade ( Akst, 2011). The crowd-sourced solution was published in the peer-reviewed, academic journal Nature Structural and Molecular Biology ( Khatib et al. 2011).

An emphasis on developing capabilities in a learner-directed, non-linear and process-oriented way makes it particularly well suited to today's digital generation, where connectivity, creativity and reflexivity are foundational to global citizenship and collaboration.

These models represent a departure from mainstream structures of higher learning. Just as social media and Web 2.0 turned a "one-to-many", broadcast model of Web 1.0 on its head, the notion of peer-to-peer, self-determined, decentred learning within the context of a learning community characterized by principles of social justice, equity and inclusion may sound utopian: "It is [...] no easy task to adopt a decentralised model, since it will require massive procedural, economic and professional change in higher education" (Weller, 2009, in Corneli and Danoff, 2011). Yet in many ways, heutagogy and paragogy simply extend constructivist and critical frameworks, reimagined for a digital generation and a global community.

A provocative 2003 article by Carol Twigg references higher education as largely a "handicraft industry", with most courses developed by individual faculty for unique cohorts of students:
Currently in higher education, both on campus and online, we individualize faculty practice (that is, we allow individual faculty members great latitude in course development and delivery) and standardize the student learning experience (that is, we treat all students in a course as if their learning needs, interests, and abilities were the same). Instead, we need to do just the opposite (Twigg, 2003, p.38).
Globalization has led to global classrooms, where difference among learners is the rule rather than the exception, spanning culture, language, gender, sexual orientation, faith, ability, social location, migration history and standpoint. It is unsurprising that educational institutions struggle with students' accommodation needs and demands: it is hard to reconcile standardized curricula with learner heterogeneity along multiple intersecting dimensions.

An analogous example can be seen in advances in chronic disease management. Like education, medicine has traditionally delivered care via an expert model, where treatment is provided based on clinical diagnoses and evidence-informed interventions. In acute settings this works well, however the highest costs and challenges to health care today relate to chronic disease prevention and management. Unlike acute medical problems, chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension are, by definition, ongoing and rely on patients' own decisions and motivation regarding health behaviour change. New models of medicine are now focusing on patient self-management and enhancing motivation for change, whereby the system of care (both formal and informal) surrounds - and is largely directed by - each patient for him or herself ( Frenk et al., 2010).

Similarly, while instructor-led curricula may be effective for brief episodic and "acute" educational needs, programs of study to prepare students for "chronic lifelong learning" demand student self-management and motivational enhancement. Just as chronic disease prevention supports patients in becoming their own health care leaders, our increasingly complex and digitally connected world places a demand on higher education to shift focus towards more effectively helping learners to become their own teachers within formal and informal networks of guidance and support. This does not negate our role as subject matter expert, but it does place the onus - quite rightly - on supporting students' capacity for nuanced critical reflection, judgment and decision-making.

Radically self-determined and networked learning approaches (like heutagogy and paragogy) affirm individuals as experts in their lives and learning trajectories. As Stuart Brand famously said, "information wants to be free". So does learning.

View the June 3, 2013 presentation for the College and Degree Operating Group (CDOG) conference on the topic of "Andragogy 2.0? Introducing emerging frameworks for teaching and learning: Paragogy and Heutagogy" on Slideshare.

Related articles:
Androgy 2.0: Emerging Theories of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advances in education theory for a digital world This article is abbreviated from: Herie, M. (2013). Andragogy 2.0? Teaching and Learning in the Global Classroom: Heutagogy and Paragogy. Global Citizen Digest, 2(2): 8-14. Whether implicit or explicit, everyone has a theory of teaching and learning. This gets expressed and enacted by how we engage...

# data[].attributes.body
Heutagogy is hmmm

# data[].attributes.body
https://educateria.com/2014/01/05/paragogy-and-heutagogy/
Heutagogy: Self determine learning
Paragogy: peer-to-peer and decentred learning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhey6ZRIo9Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2XCuMwKLzw

# data[].attributes.body
Heautagogy is self-directed learning while Paragogy is peer-led learning. Both are an extension of constructivist andragogy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PARAGOGY. A NEW THEORY IN EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES | Herlo | Journal Plus Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PARAGOGY. A NEW THEORY IN EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES