That is not a stupid question at all. I spent an hour discussing it with someone involved in Wikiversity a few weeks ago. In a nutshell, although the title Wikiversity sounds like their model is similar to ours, the ideas and goals are actually quite different. P2PU is focusing on one thing: helping self-learners learn with each other in an open social learning model. Wikiversity has a much broader and more ambitious vision. According to its website it is “devoted to learning resources, learning projects, and research for use in all levels, types, and styles of education from pre-school to university, including professional training and informal learning.”

We also made a decision early on that we wanted to start P2PU by creating a strong community of individuals who share a common set of values, and then scale up in a way that would retain that sense of community and shared culture. That is different from the Wikipedia (and Wikiversity) model, which takes its strength from openness. We feel that there are important differences between the social process of learning and the social process of collaboration around a common artefact which can easily be modularized (such as an encyclopedia).

And finally, Wikiversity is a Wikimedia Foundation project, which has implications for governance strategic decisions they can take (for example, the choice of technology). When we started out, we wanted as little constraints as possible, and we wanted to give our idea some time to grow in a safe space.

While I took some time to point out the differences here, we definitely see ourselves as part of a bigger movement that includes Wikiversity (and Wikieducator and many others). We are all trying to increase opportunities for participation in useful human endeavors like education.

I hope this answered your question.

The p2pu is a great initiative! Just a stupid question to which I did not find an answer in the faq: why is the p2pu not a part of the Wikiversity?