what is the difference between PEX and PEP1?

PEX is a list of everything that anybody can think of.

PEP1 is a subset of the PEX list, featuring a set of things that I think would be a good skill set. There is a possibility of certifying somebody as "PEP1" meaning that they have completed the full list.

I think it is possible that there could be other people that would set claim to a letter, like "J" and say something about how they are going to process folks for certification under "PEJ1" - which is different from PEP1.

I don't think people should do something like "PEV1" where "V" is for "vegan". This suggests that that one person is the ultimate authority in veganism for all vegans - which isn't really fair. It would have to be something where "john jones" could say "PEJ1" and then say "which is strictly vegan.

paul wheaton wrote:I think it is possible that there could be other people that would set claim to a letter, like "J" and say something about how they are going to process folks for certification under "PEJ1" - which is different from PEP1.

I don't think people should do something like "PEV1" where "V" is for "vegan". This suggests that that one person is the ultimate authority in veganism for all vegans - which isn't really fair. It would have to be something where "john jones" could say "PEJ1" and then say "which is strictly vegan.

Doesn't this, by it's nature, limit the number of people who could potentially set their own standards by the number of letters? Personally, I'd have gone with X (for my middle initial) for my own since PED reminds me of child-focused things thanks to years of ECE training. That one is gone for the general stuff, so assuming I wanted to use the letter system and picked D, what happens when someone named Dave or Donald want to as well?

I'm not knocking the system, but mostly just looking ahead and wondering how it would adapt over time if a lot of people felt a desire to set their own standards.

D. Logan wrote:

paul wheaton wrote:I think it is possible that there could be other people that would set claim to a letter, like "J" and say something about how they are going to process folks for certification under "PEJ1" - which is different from PEP1.

I don't think people should do something like "PEV1" where "V" is for "vegan". This suggests that that one person is the ultimate authority in veganism for all vegans - which isn't really fair. It would have to be something where "john jones" could say "PEJ1" and then say "which is strictly vegan.

Doesn't this, by it's nature, limit the number of people who could potentially set their own standards by the number of letters? Personally, I'd have gone with X (for my middle initial) for my own since PED reminds me of child-focused things thanks to years of ECE training. That one is gone for the general stuff, so assuming I wanted to use the letter system and picked D, what happens when someone named Dave or Donald want to as well?

I'm not knocking the system, but mostly just looking ahead and wondering how it would adapt over time if a lot of people felt a desire to set their own standards.

Take a cover from Sepp Holzer's book? Call it 'John Doe's PE"?

D. Logan wrote:Doesn't this, by it's nature, limit the number of people who could potentially set their own standards by the number of letters?

Yes.

But how many people are going to offer a certifying program? I'm guessing it might be six or seven.

And even then, it is possible that somebody goes to all the effort to set up a certifying program and they use "PEQ" put together by somebody else.

If we get to the point that there are 20 and we are running out of letters, then we could go to having two letters: PETL or PESM, etc.

The key is that I think it is important to say that I am just one voice. I am not THE authority. Some people will like my recipe and, I expect, most people will like some other recipe better.

My feeble attempt at a venn diagram

As a dozen different PEX standards evolve, then PEX will get bigger and bigger. And we will start to see some similar stuff between all of the different standards. But I think that PEX will always be far larger than all of the standards. After all, PEP1 and PEK1 and PET1 and ____ are all about gaining a certain amount of skill in about three years according to the standards of, maybe, a dozen people. PEX is going to be covering more of a lifetime of stuff according the standards of thousands of people.

Paul - thanks for pointing me this direction.

So PEP is meaning PE Paul... your specific flavour on permaculture? I guess I can see the value in that kind of branding, especially where we are talking about high profile figures. But would you see each new practitioner then evolving their own set of requirements for , for the sake of argument PEM (PE Mike). Running over here on my soils and my climate my list is going to look a fair bit different to yours. Lots of similarities, but with a regional flavour.

Basically if I were to walk on to your land your PEP1 lists are totally tailored for your local.

I see the merit in that, but at the same time I also see a lot of merit in keeping the criteria less rigid and less specific. By couching your criteria in a different manner it becomes more broadly relevant. Perhaps one approach might be to include elements of both strategies. Each PEP element could have a general descriptor and a sample list.

The gardening requirements might become:

General Brief : "Grow fruit and veggies for 100 well balanced meals using no pesticides or fertilisers, making use of between 15 and 30 crops"

Paul's crop suggestions :
Potatoes
Tomatoes
etc...

Paul's Growing Method Suggestions:
Drip irrigation only
No irrigation
chop-n-drop

You still put your flavour on it, for your locality, but there is also a sense of continuity of requirements between PEP and PEM... they may all have the same General Brief but the suggested varieties or growing methods may vary between practitioner. It would also allow you the flexibility to mentor/support someone working on their own land some distance away. If they can justify their list of fruits and veggies for their circumstances they can still meet the General Brief but tweaked optimally to their circumstances.

Here is another thing:


Suppose we all pull together a really excellent PEP1. It is very specific to my values and my property. Suppose it took 30 of us about 600 hours total to put it all together. And we make it public. Then all sorts of people will want that list to be different. No problem. Using about ten hours, they can probably make something that is precisely different they way they think is best and call it "PEM1". With just a little effort, anybody can use it as a template to create anything they want.

So a whole lot of work goes into making PEP1, but it is really the ground work for a dozen programs that fall under the PEX umbrella.

paul wheaton wrote:Here is another thing:

Suppose we all pull together a really excellent PEP1. It is very specific to my values and my property. Suppose it took 30 of us about 600 hours total to put it all together. And we make it public. Then all sorts of people will want that list to be different. No problem. Using about ten hours, they can probably make something that is precisely different they way they think is best and call it "PEM1". With just a little effort, anybody can use it as a template to create anything they want.

So a whole lot of work goes into making PEP1, but it is really the ground work for a dozen programs that fall under the PEX umbrella.

Paul, this totally makes sense - we can customise our lists etc... but I would still argue that an overarching statement of purpose for each PEP/PEM/PEJ etc... would be worthwhile and would help harmonise across an array of otherwise potentially disparate and varyingly rigorous approaches.

If every PE(P/M/J/D)1: Gardening had had the same core principal leading it then people composing their own lists have a reference of the philosophy behind it. I think this is important so that everyone can sing for the same sheet. There is already quite a bit of discussion going on about the various degrees of difficulty and the number and weights or plants... defining your overall philosophy behind the PEP1 doesn't detract from your highly customised list for your conditions (or prevent anyone else customising their own list).

I guess you could say I'm drawn to want to understand they WHY of what I would study, not just a list of WHAT. When I teach maths I always try to make clear the context, the WHY so to speak, rather than just work through a list of material - it has a big impact on motivation and engagement of students in the learning process.

"PE1 : gardening"

After a year you will have grown a variety of crops sufficient to provide xxx balanced meals, and will have sufficient knowledge and experience to grow food for a family of xxx using permaculture principals appropriate to your area and conditions.

PEP1 :- Paul Wheaton certifies PEP1 on the basis of this list of plants and methods suitable for his conditions in Montana.

50lbs Potatoes...

I think it is valid to create "PEX: gardening" right next door to "PEP1: gardening". Under "PEX: gardening" can be the different belts which might talk about kinds of challenges and experiences, plus a possible total calorie count. It could also explore how some programs might allow certain types of irrigation, while others will focus heavily on hugelkultur and mulching.