From paragogy-latest.pdf by Joseph Corneli and Charles Jeffrey Danoff.

1. Review what was supposed to happen.
   People are supposed to choose and assemble suitable learning resources (blogs, OER, etc.) for their courses, in which everyone is supposed to learn something.

2. Establish what happened.
   This is essentially what happened, but it is hard to measure when and whether knowledge was gained.

3. Determine what was right or wrong with what happened.
   The organization is striving to handle the complexity of life online. The system is explicitly in an experimental “beta” stage, and people who participate in betas are guinea pigs (and should know this). Quality control has a somewhat precarious meaning in a beta or “eternal beta”, but this makes life interesting.

4. Determine how the task should be done differently the next time.
   In terms of measuring learning, P2PU would have to work hard to use anything but “participation” as a proxy value. In terms of broader issues of quality control, one thought is for P2PU core members to “eat their own dogfood” and use the platform to organize their activities. Indeed, everyone involved with the project could, in theory, use the platform to help measure their “stetch/churn” as they document what they’re learning.