Views are my own.
In the second half of 2023, I ran a small experiment: a 4-week study group that took about 20 people across APAC from "I have a question on the forums" to "I'm ready for the MongoDB Developer certification exam."
The pilot never became a full program. Only one person ended up taking the exam. But it's still one of the community projects I learned the most from, so I want to write down what happened.
The idea
On the MongoDB Community Forums, the University section is full of people working through courses and getting stuck on real questions. Some were already strong. Others were clearly hungry to learn. I kept thinking the same thing: these people are answering each other in isolated threads, and they'd probably learn faster, and stick around longer, if they did this together.
So the pitch was simple:
- Put motivated learners in a group
- Have them discuss, share what they learned each week, and form actual connections
- Give them a clear finish line, the MongoDB Developer certification, with a 100% discount code so cost wasn't a barrier
The goal was as much about community as certification. A cert is a nice outcome, but a group of people who know each other and keep showing up is the real win.
Picking the cohort
I selected around 20 people from across APAC. Most came from the forums, specifically the University section, where I could see who was asking good questions and who kept coming back. I gave preference to MongoDB User Group leaders and community creators, since they'd carry what they learned back to their own communities.
Choosing people by how they actually behaved on the forum, instead of an application form, worked well. I already knew their curiosity level and how they communicated.
How the 4 weeks ran
I built a week-by-week plan around the official exam guide. Each week had:
- A focus area from the exam guide
- Resources and MongoDB University courses to work through
- Quizzes to check understanding
We met on Zoom twice a week. These sessions weren't lectures. Learners shared what they'd studied that week, talked through the parts that confused them, and answered each other's questions. I mostly facilitated.
Between sessions, I created a private forum category just for the cohort. People posted their weekly learnings and doubts there, and the replies started coming from other learners, not just me. That was my favorite part to watch.
What actually happened
Here is the honest outcome:
- About 20 people started
- 12 to 13 stayed engaged until the end of the four weeks
- Only 1 took the exam, and he passed
The rest were genuinely engaged and wanted to take it, but personal and professional commitments got in the way. And I had made a decision that contributed to that: the discount codes were valid for only 3 months. For busy working professionals, that window closed before many of them could schedule it.
Why the pilot didn't continue
One exam taker out of 20 is a low conversion rate, and the program also needed a lot of hands-on oversight to run. Between those two things, it wasn't picked up as an ongoing program.
I don't see that as a failure of the idea. Engagement was strong, people told me the sessions and the support helped their preparation, and a cohort of 12 to 13 people stayed through the whole thing. But if the success metric is "certifications earned," this pilot didn't hit it, and it's fair to say so.
What I'd do differently
Make the finish line closer. Three months sounds generous, but in practice it let the exam drift to "later." I'd tie the exam to the end of the program, with a booking date set in week one.
Gamify it. If I ran it again, I'd add milestones: finish two weeks, earn a badge or some swag. Small rewards give people a reason to keep momentum, especially when life gets busy. The study group should feel like a game people want to keep playing, not just homework with friends.
Plan for the oversight cost. A program like this needs a lot of human attention. If it's going to scale, the facilitation has to be shared, for example with trained learner-leaders running their own sub-groups.
Measure engagement, not only conversion. I tracked the exam taker count, but the stronger signal was how many people stayed active for four weeks. I'd define success metrics up front that include both.
What I took away from it
A few things I now believe about community building:
- People show up for people. The Zoom sessions and the private forum category did more for retention than the study material did.
- Motivation is not the same as availability. Wanting to do something and having the time are different problems, and a program has to solve for the second one.
- A small pilot is a good way to learn. I'd rather find out with 20 people what doesn't work than discover it after building something large.
- Honest write-ups are worth it. Not every community experiment succeeds. The ones that don't still teach you something worth sharing.
If you run a user group, a forum, or any learning community, a study group is a low-cost experiment worth trying. Just set the exam date early, and give people a reason to keep going.
Top comments (2)
12 or 13 out of 20 still active at week four is a strong cohort. Most self-paced courses would kill for that. Your point about booking the exam date in week one is the one I'd underline. A finish line three months out isn't really a finish line.
On the oversight cost: what we've seen work is giving each weekly topic to a learner, who posts the recap and the open questions in the private category. You still facilitate, but you aren't the only one writing.
Disclosure: I work on Learnomy, a WordPress LMS that puts cohorts and a discussion space next to each course, which is basically your Zoom-plus-private-category setup. Your write-up holds up whatever tool someone uses.
the booking date in week one feels like the right fix. one small addition: have everyone book their slot together in the same session and post the date in the forum category. a date 12 other people have seen is a lot harder to quietly push to "later" than one picked alone