Cooptic is an initiative for innovation transfer funded by the European Commission within the framework of the Leonardo da Vinci project. Four partners specializing in innovative teaching methods - Suprago Florac and Outils-Réseaux (Montpellier), the Cooperation School Aposta from Catalonia and the Regional Centre for Environmental Initiatives (CRIE Mouscron) from Wallonia – joined forces to work on adapting a training tool for collaborative project facilitators.
During the Cooptic project, fifteen people from three countries (Belgium, France and Spain) received training to become trainers of cooperative project and network facilitators, in their respective circles.
Cooptic today has 60 network facilitators forming a real pool in three European countries. This network developed over the course of three years:
Introducing the team of partners
The Cooptic programme linked four structures:
Supagro Florac: Agriculture and Environmental Education Institute has been providing training to facilitators of many themes and geographic networks on public agricultural education for many years, as well as providing technical support for them. Recognized nationally for its expertise in education sciences and its experimental teaching activities and for promoting innovative training tools, Supagro Florac shares its knowledge with its partners in this project. It also oversaw the creation and coordination of the whole project.
The ‘reference’ association in France for networking. Its main mission is to start and accompany cooperative networks and practices using methodological tools and the Internet. In 2010, Outils-Réseaux created the Animacoop training tool for facilitators and professionals working in the fields of cooperation and network facilitation. This Animacoop tool was a part of the European Cooptic project.
Catalan association: Cooperation school in charge of transfer in Catalonia.
Walloon association for environmental education in charge of transfer in Wallonia.
These partners brought together the skills of several institutions, universities, researchers, and local actors and groups engaging in participatory development who actively participated in drafting the e-book you have in your hands.
Introduction to the learning tool
The Cooptic learning tool is based on educational principles that aim to accompany trainees along the path to autonomy and building their capacity to carry out informed actions. Trainees are the main focus of the teaching tool. These principles lead to the choice of teaching methods and resources that are articulated around three ideas: the crosscutting nature of knowledge and collaborative skills to be learnt; a link to the professional projects of trainees; and the use of the possibilities offered by digital tools to innovate in teaching practices.
What can be learnt with the Cooptic training?
The training contents favour the development of operational skills linked to the facilitation of cooperative projects: managing information, co-producing resources, starting network dynamics, group facilitation…
These contents are structured around 12 key concepts and 12 crosscutting collaborative skills:
These collaborative skills are dealt with in parallel at three different levels:
at an individual level, training develops the engagement of a person in a collaborative project,
at a group level, training deals with understanding group dynamics, networks, groups and skills to manage a group,
a third level relating to the environment refers to openness factors and communication “outside” the network.
How is the learning done?
During a training period of 14 weeks, trainees work remotely and on-site following a progression in three parallel itineraries:
Individual itinerary:
On-line contents follow the stages in a network’s existence.
Creation of the network: the group is established, a “group of individuals” becomes aware that it is a learning group.
The network becomes informed: exchanges on the projects lead to a set of common experiences and problems.
The network is transformed: individual and collective events are created in small-group collaborative work.
Network outreach: spreading the outcomes of the cooperation works outside the community brings value to it.
Network consolidation: this allows for an assessment and a reflexion on how to maintain the dynamics alive and how to open up to others.
Collective trainee itinerary :
Trainees produce new contents collectively
Project itinerary :
The creation of a collaborative project by the trainee is a pre-requisite, and the activities refer to this project throughout the training. During the first week, trainees introduce the context and the object of their project, and then test the methods and tools on their project, explaining the whole experience relating to their own personal learning process. At each of the three meetings, an update is given on how the training has contributed so far to the project’s progress. Training actions speed up the project in its professional context and the lessons learnt from the training reciprocally become more “tangible” since they are implicit in the action.
A pedagogy impacted by new technologies
A training ecosystem:
A methodology to move from “network facilitators” to “trainers of network facilitators”
A combination of on-site and distance exchanges using Internet-based tools
Using collaborative tools and methods during the training process.
Moments to exchange practices
Individual work on the trainees’ collaborative projects
Co-generation of knowledge: pedagogical training plans.
The Cooptic ebook
The ebook that you are handling contains the resources used during the CoopTic training session. Some were written specifically for the ebook because the contents were presented orally during training. This book is a state of our knowledge in the field of cooperation and collaboration at the time of writing in late 2013. But this is an area that is just beginning to be studied and we continue to experiment, to imagine, to try, to dream ... To make it short, even if the publication of this ebook is the outcome of the European project Leonardo CoopTic, this is not the end but just the bases of our future projects: a resource center on collaboration? A MOOC? Or perhaps something that does not exist yet!
Enjoy your reading and your "small irreversible cooperation experiences" to come!
They took part in the adventure !
Coordination :
Hélène Laxenaire
Authors :
Gatien Bataille
Jean-Michel Cornu
Antoine Delarue
FNAMI LR
Mathilde Guiné
Claire Herrgott
Emilie Hullo
Corinne Lamarche
Hélène Laxenaire
Heather Marsh
Laurent Marseault
Daniel Mathieu
Outils-réseaux
Jordi Picart i Barrot
Manon Pierrel
Frédéric Renier
Violette Roche
Elzbieta Sanojca
SupAgro Florac
Vincent Tardieu
Laurent Tézenas
Françoise Viala
and the Animacoop trainees.
Drawings :
Eric Grelet
Conception of routes
Claire d'Hauteville
Hélène Laxenaire
Elzbieta Sanojca
Translation in French :
Collaborative translation by members of the group AnimFr (article about stimergy)
Translation in English :
Koinos
Suzy Lewis-Vialar
Abdel Guerdane
Translation in Catalan :
Koinos
Jordi Picart i Barrot
Proofreading (of the French part) :
Caroline Seguin
Standardization of texts :
Cathy Azema
Gatien Bataille
David Delon
Corinne Lamarche
Hélène Laxenaire
Christian Resche
Cécile Trédaniel
Development:
Florian Schmitt
Graphic standards :
Imago design
Settlement and monitoring of the Leonardo project
Guy Levêque
Cathy Azema
Martine Pedulla
Stéphanie Guinard
This work was achieved within the framework of a project of transfer of innovation (TOI) funded by the European Union through the Leonardo Da Vinci program.
All the contents (texts, images, videos) are under Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0 FR license. This means that you can freely distribute, modify and use them in a commercial context. You have two obligations: quote the original authors and the content that you create from ours should be shared in the same conditions under CC-BY-SA .
Dropbox
Card's author : Outils-réseaux et SupAgro Florac
Card's type of licence :
Creative Commons BY-SA
To begin with :
Dropbox is a backup service to synchronise and share data, it is very simple. You download a programme that only takes up a small space on the task bar. Then you allocate a file on your computer that will be backed up and synchronised on the Internet. You log on and you're set: now, all forms of files, copied or backed up in your Dropbox documents will instantly be sent via the Internet is a safe way.
This allows synchronising your data automatically on all computers (desktop, laptop, work) and easily sharing documents with other users. Files are available on the hard disk, meaning you can work with them even without an Internet connection.
The free version comes with 2 G of space but the paying version allows you to extend this capacity.
Being authorized to install software on a computer
It works for all platforms: Linux, Mac Os and Windows
Some practical uses :
Synchronising your files automatically on all your computers without issues with versions (Which is the good version? The one on my laptop? The one on my pen drive?)
Sharing a file and documents (of all types, office, images…) with one or several people
Working on your documents even if you have no access to the Internet
Creating a photo gallery visible to all easily
Having a public space on the net to upload large files and send files that are too heavy to send via email
Having an automatic backup of your files
Having access to files from any computer with an internet connection.
Using the tools :
Going further :
Advantages :
All files always at hand, from any computer
Sharing all supported document formats in real time, automatically and with different people
Working on files even if you have no internet connection
Backing-up files automatically
Dropbox saves the last versions of files, so older versions can be recovered in the event of an error.
Drawbacks :
Sharing files doesn't work very well when it's a document that several people are working on at the same time or during the same time period together (i.e. filling in a file to be submitted in two days time, planning for network members) since when two people work on a document at the same time, both versions are saved and then changes to merge the documents must be done manually.
For this kind of use it is preferable to use a tool that allows synchronized changes such as Etherpad or Google Document
Having two Drobpox accounts on the same computer is complicated and often causes errors
Documents in shared files use space on the 2G allocated.
Licence :
Proprietary software, Freemium
Using :
Easy
Setting up :
Easy
Etherpad
Card's author : Frédéric Renier, Supagro Florac
Card's type of licence :
Creative Commons BY-SA
To begin with : An Etherpad is an online-service which allows several persons to take notes simultaneously. A chat is linked to each page? Etherpad is also a freeware which can be settled on a server.
Collaborative note-taking in a meeting. The consequences on dominating relationships are important, this custom contributes to move the lines.
Note-taking between remote partners by coupling the pad with a videoconferencing tool. However it is not always easy to share one's attention and screen between two apps.
Live control of the meeting's progress, with a possibility to ask questions in the Chat.
By opening an account on Framapad.org, you create a working space where you can invite users (with a password protected access), create peculiar pads for the group thus created, and have access to management features from your pads : listing, archiving, downloading, deleting. A pad created from an account is therefore only restricted, by default, to the members of the account (private), but it can also be opened to all as all public pads, or else protected by a specific password. Tutorial on the interest and the use of private pads
Advantages :
The classic of first irreversible cooperation experiences.
So very easy to use, every contribution is directly noticeable by others, many export possibilities, allows a synchronised co-writing, "wysiwyg" (page layout can be done in any word processor).
Notes taken are more complete.
Drawbacks :
Creating a pad directly from the web browser address toolbar can be a major methodological obstacle.
Limited to 16 simultaneous
Depending on the internet connection quality, the experience can be totally counterproductive.
Licence :
Open sources, Free
Using :
Easy
Setting up :
Reserved for IT Jedis
Framadate
Card's author : Outils-Réseaux et SupAgro Florac
Card's type of licence :
Creative Commons BY-SA
To begin with : Small and simple tool to agree on a date with a group or to create a small survey.
Only suggest dates when the people who are required to attend are available
Avoid suggesting too many dates, as this dilutes answers. A possible consequence of this: the date with most votes only represents a small minority within the group.
Set a deadline for each survey
Pay attention when several Framedates are open: take note of replies
Advantages :
It perfectly meets the needs of groups when searching for a common date.
The fact that other participants can see the replies of others encourages them to reach a consensus.
This tool is extremely easy, using it with beginner groups can be a first stage, a "small and irreversible experience".
Free software
Hosted by a "Loi 1901" association: data are not kept or resold.
It avoids flooding an email account with useless emails when trying to agree on a date among several people.
Drawbacks :
This tool does not solve the issue of unavailability.
Those replying first have more advantages.
Not convenient for confidential meetings or secret choices, since with these surveys participants are visible to everyone.
This service is maintained by volunteers: service availability is not guaranteed
Freeplane is a free software application which can be settled locally on the PC (Mac, Windows and Linux). It allows the creation of mind maps and their html export in a webpage.
To start a mind map, the topic of reflection is placed in the centre. For each new idea linked to the topic, a branch is created and the idea is written in a node. Then the branch is developed by creating secondary branches.? - When all the ideas are on the map, it's time to format it, to add icons, drawings or images, to choose colours for each branch. The more formatted and illustrated, the more understandable and easy to remember it will be.?
To translate visually the hierarchy of ideas, we generally go from the general (written large and in the centre) to the specific (written smaller and smaller as we move away from the centre) .
With mind maps both cerebral hemispheres work in synergy. Association and imagination process peculiar to thinking can notably be used. Having to locate a concept somewhere on the map forces to think about the other concepts.
It is a tool which enables to show a problem's complexity
There are numerous online resources about mind maps (how to use, examples, tricks...)
Drawbacks : Freeplane is a software with numerous functions, which can be difficult to handle.
Licence :
Open sources, Free
Using :
It could be easier but also more complicated
Setting up :
Easy
Google calendar
Card's author : Hélène Laxenaire - SupAgro Florac
Card's type of licence :
Creative Commons BY-SA
To begin with : Google Calendar is a tool by Google that allows keeping an on-line calendar (available on a computer or a smartphone) that can be shared or posted on a website. This tool allows sharing an organization's events or meetings calendar, knowing the planning of collaborators and also establishing a planning to book resources (a room, for example).
Introduction : Google Calendar is an on-line calendar that can be viewed on-line and shared. It can also be posted on a website. Google calendar allows importing other planning (created with Google Calendar or with ICS format) enabling you to visualize several different calendars on a same page. Finally, it allows group members who use Google Calendar to see each other's availability and invite them to a meeting on a given date and at a given time.
Requirements :
Having a Google account
Some practical uses :
posting upcoming meetings of an association on a website
sharing a calendar to determine the arrival times of speakers at an event. Everyone gathering information on arrival times can write them on a same calendar which is then used to see who will be going to pick them up at the station.
manage the bookings of a meeting room
Using the tools :
Going further :
Advantages :
It allows seeing the availability of all members quickly
It allows several people to gather information on timetables
Calendars with ICS format can be imported and exported for other software such as Thunderbird, so the calendar can be shared with people who do not have or do not wish to have a Google account.
Drawbacks :
It is an on-line calendar, meaning that there are more constraints than using a paper calendar, except if on a smartphone
To begin with : Google Docs is an online and free Office suite. It includes a word processor, a spreadsheet, a presentation software, a software which generates online forms and a drawing software. This suite enables to share office documents (writing protected or not) and to share the writing with others. Since the transition to google Drive, it is also possible to share other kind of documents.
Having a google account (to create and share a document : other members do not need to have one)
Being able to use an office suite (word processor, spreadsheet, slideshow)
Some practical uses :
synchronous and remote note during a phone meeting
Creation of an online survey , the results being compiled in a chart (for more information, see the sheet Tool Google Form
to prepare their programming, event planners compile in a chart names and coordinates of potential participants, data are then structured and can be treated later as for a mailing
for a training schedule, a chart is put online differentiating rights : students can consult the updated chart in real-time to acknowledge their timetable (but can't modify it) and trainers can modify it directly without having to go throuh with an intermediary
to part-draft a document which needs layout : report, etc...
to set up a slideshow which can be easily inserted in a website
Files are online and therefore can be opened from any internet connected computer.
Documents can be part-written synchronously (a coloured cursor points out who is writing) or asynchronously (a history enables to know who did what)
The « sharing for all users with the link» option allows the sharing of a document and its modification by all users even if they don't have a google account
the available document is always the latest updated (which is not the case when documents are sent by email)
Modifications are compiled in real-time, there is no problem of version
All documents are created and modified with google doc, thus there is no file format problem as when one uses Open Office and Word (doc, docx). Everyone has the same software of the same version.
Possibility to chat next to the document when working synchronously but remotely on the document
Drawbacks :
If you are not connected to internet you can't get the document.
It needs a little time of practice before understanding all the differences in rights to apply to documents. Beware not to transfer the link in the URL bar but the one given via the button Share, once the « sharing for all users with the link » option is ticked, otherwise people will not be able to open the file. You need to be particularly scrupulous to this when you start using google doc within a group because it can be very demotivating if the first sessions end up by « But I can't open your file !»
It's Google again, who will index the contents of documents to generate pop-up ads and create consumers profiles.
Licence :
Proprietary software, Free
Using :
Easy
Setting up :
No setting up
Google Forms
Card's author : SupAgro Florac
Card's type of licence :
Creative Commons BY-SA
To begin with : Free Google Document tool that allows creating on-line surveys with results displayed on a chart.
Introduction : The moving discussion (still called the Positioning game) is a dynamic form of discussion that promotes participation.
A facilitator tells a story that is purposefully controversial. At some key moments in the story, he invites several participants to move to a certain spot within the room, "those who don't agree with what has just been said go to one side, those who agree, go to the opposite side".
Nobody can stay in the middle (without a reason), moving in the room really pushes participants to take a side and to provide reasons.
Once everyone has chosen "their side", the facilitator then asks who would like to take the floor to explain their position.
To start the discussion, he may start by asking who has a strong view regarding what was just said.
When one side has given their reasons, it's the turn of the other side to express its reasons. It is like a game of ping-pong. If one of the participants decides that a reason given by the other side is valid, he or she may change sides.
When the facilitator decides, the discussion ends and the story continues until the next controversial statement or situation arises, when the discussion starts again.
Requirements :
A minimum number of participants (around ten).
A controversial story where participants can feel represented.
A spacious room.
Posters to mark-off the different areas (agree, disagree).
Explaining the rules of the game (nobody is forced to speak, but they must all choose a side).
Activity duration: 1:30h seems a reasonable duration.
Some practical uses :
Breaking the ice quickly between participants, having to take a side quickly becomes a game and contributes to participation.
Promoting the participation of the largest number of people, if the facilitator encourages those who have not yet spoken to take the floor.
Clarifying everyone's position; showing the diversity of opinions in one another.
Using the tools : An example of a moving discussion organised by SCOP Le Pavé
Going further :
It is possible to write down the reasons as they arise in the discussion and map them.
It is possible to give each side 5 minutes or more to fine-tune their reasons collectively.
Advantages :
The activity does not require any materials.
It is set-up quickly.
Can be done outdoors to give participants fresh air.
With this format, discussions become a moment of pleasure.
Drawbacks :
It is not certain that the discussion will actually "flow".
Some participants who do not feel comfortable in a group or with the logic of reasons may feel excluded; this form of discussion should be complemented with other forms depending on available time, number of participants and goals.
Licence :
Free
Using :
Easy
Setting up :
No setting up
Networks under license CC BY SA that last
Card's author : Gatien Bataille
Card's type of licence :
Creative Commons BY-SA
Description :
Introduction: A world adrift
A little fiction to start with...
Instructions: Imagine today's world with these data
A few milleniums ago to use an "e" one will have to pay me royalties... What if you tried your first speech ? (Have your wallet ready !!) Milleniums ago, mankind had to round a major cape: the invention of writing and alphabets. A little ahead on my time, I quickly glimpse the interest of protecting the letter "e" with a restrictive licence. From now on, every time you wish to use this letter, pay ! Or reduce your ambitions ;-)
We are in a workshop in Mesopotamia, 3500 years before Jesus Christ. By a stroke of genius (mainly inspired by nature ! But Hushhhhhh...) I have just invented the wheel ! A little ahead on my time, I quickly glimpse the interest to protect this invention by a restrictive license. From now on, every time you wish to use a wheel, you will have to pay royalties... Imagine what your current life is like now !
350,000 years ago, on the edge of a cave I have been trying for days and days to reproduce the fire we cherish and maintain when it falls from the sky. And then finally I come across the "reproducible method". A little ahead on my time, I quickly glimpse the interest to protect this invention by a restrictive license. From now on, every time you wish to light a fire you will have to pay royalties... Imagine what your current life is like now !
Now let's turn into reality
An Australian company succeeded in placing a license on a human gene bound to a precise type of cancer. Result: In order to study this gene to find a drug, you pay ...
"A" is a Polish company that sells books online. Apple took this company to court for misuse of his "brand" ... and yes, the website of "A" was a.pl.
A primary school teacher had launched a blog on which she exchanged with her pupils some French exercises. She was taken to court by the daily paper "Le Figaro" for misuse of its brand mark...And yes, the blog of the teacher was called " Madame Figaro's blog " (but Figaro was really the lady's name).
Monsanto reattempts once more to place its soybean seeds under the control of a license, preventing any forward person who has not paid royalties to re-sow the soybean seeds produced in his own field.
Several newspaper companies (Canadian and German) try to pass or have passed laws to prohibit the right to make links to their content without paying royalties first.
Thus, an Irish company asked 200 euros by hypertext link to its content.
A Canadian company demands 150 euros for the use of a simple extract of its contents (which is just like eliminating a previous law: the right to quote).
The I will Shoe Company has registered "I will" as a trademark. On this legal base, the company takes to court those using these words... Until now, it has only taken to court direct competitors (like Nike for example). But who will be next ?
The content ID which permanently scans videos posted on Youtube led to the withdrawal of several videos on the pretext of violation of copyright. The video of an amateur of nature is to be withdrawn because of birdsongs in the background (recorded straight in the wild) because recognized by the ID as violating copyrights (by mistake of course).
The amateur video of russian meteorites was considered as violating the copyright because one could hear far off a song on the radio...
Quite a lot of authors alerted by the robot on possible violations of their copyright prefer not to step in to share the advertising income generated by Google.
Discussions are taking place currently to place DRM on HTML5 language. This would prevent the "free" use of this yet universal language which is the basis of the Internet.
Audi has registered an IP licence on the letter "Q" to protect its car the Audi Q... we come here to limits which raise questions... protecting simple letters jeopardize the simple act of writing !
The DRM (digital rights management)
The DR aim to control the use made of digital works. These devices can be applied to all types of physical digital media (records, DVD, Blu-ray, software, etc.) or of diffusion (TV broadcast, Internet devices, etc.) thanks to a system of conditionnal access.
Limiting copies is only a superficial reason for the addition of DRM to a technology. DRM completely fail when it's about preventing copies, but they are highly effective to avoid any innovation. Indeed DRM are covered by the anti-circumvention laws such as the famous 1998's DMCA (US Digital Millennium Copyright Act) and the 2002's EUCD (EU Copyright Directive) ; each one turns circumvention into a crime, even if the law is not broken.
Why are we here?
The advent of open licenses or of licenses easing broadcast, L'arrivée des licences ouvertes ou facilitant la diffusion, the always easier and larger virtualization of data and knowledge and 3D printers which allow do nearly everything have highly stiffen governments' position (under the lobbying of companies) concerning copyrights and intellectual property.
A fundamental shift is underway to restrain freedom...
Rights managers which see those rights constrained by the arrival of the web and digitalization exercise an important lobbying with states.
States as for them are unable to organize a real public debate on the question and are influenced by lobbies
Finally semi-finished technics (web server, sharing platform...) are pressurized to implement tools for the protection of copyrights of the works on the server. Willing to protect themselves, they are a part of the general hardening of copyright.
There are worrying situations of rights limitation which will have dreadful consequences across the world !
Reaction is getting organized but it must be supported beacuse opponents are fierce and well equipped.
Copyfraud
Wikipedia: Fraudulent copyright's claim, for example claiming rights on public works.
We are seeing more and more layings of copyrights on works or objects that should not be subject to rights (e.g. the ban to take photos of Mona Lisa in the Louvre). These rights are illegal but uncontested because now nobody defends the public domain (little clarified in the law).
And nevertheless
A concrete case :: Let's protect Mickey !
Isn't Walt Disney's success resting to a large extent on the fact he drew freely from the heritage of the tales and the legends, which became meanwhile literary models of the public domain? Disney, among others has given life to iconic characters such as Snow White, the Little Mermaid, or Beauty and the Beast. He changed them, "remixed them", reincarnated them. The result made him rich This commercial success lays its toot on the use of a common cultural inheritance.
The result is a "duty of restitution" to the community.
Or should it be possible to claim exclusive rights to operate for 120 years - i.e. beyond the creator's death - something originating in our common culture?
Disney should rather leave Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck to free exposure to public, investments having already been covered several time.
A society must be able to rely on its unlimited creative capacity to produce new works. Creators must be able to draw freely from the wealth of cultural patrimony. Our culture is an inexhaustible reservoir of stories, images, musics and many other things - provided that access to the property is not hindered or rarefied. Culture depends on the contribution of each one and does not try to avail itself unfairly - "for eternity less a day" - of private rights on cultural goods.
Open licenses: brief reminder
Free licenses are just tools for mankind to organize the framework of cooperation. Hence they impact on our practices as much as we impact on them and therefore there is a risk of preventing – or favoring – the appearance of new uses.
These free licenses base the legal support of a movement which we call " the free ".
There are several licenses, some more open than others, some more specific to certain, some more specific to types of works than others...
There are nearly a hundred ! Some standards are nevertheless imposed by organizations such as the Creative Commons Foundation and Open Source Initiative.
Two important licenses
The GNU GPL (General Public Licence)
It's the first free license. It appeared with the first free and open source software. Historically meant for software, it is getting more and more documented and its scope is expanding !
This licence allows 5 things :
1: the free right to use a program whatever the goal.
2: the free right to seek how the program works and how to adapt it to one's needs.
3: the free right to transfer the program to others and to make copies for others.
4: the free right to improve the program and to give free access to these improvements for the general benefit.
Freedom 2 and 4 implies an accessible source code.
This is of paramount importance but is not always the case with "application" via other licenses (like Creatives Commons licenses for example - see below) Thus, it is compulsory to provide the "source code" of the work in a readable-by-all format and without constraint. Sharing "source code" in PDF format is not suitable here because it is not readable and cannot be copied without the possession of a particular program (not free itself)
And freedom 3 and 4 ignore author's rights as far as the author's explicit consent has not been asked for. With the licence, there was no need to ask for the author's authorization: it was already granted.
However, these four freedoms are not sufficient as each person who alters a program or develops it becomes ipso facto co-author. So users should ask for agreement in order to work on the upgraded version and send it to others. In case the new author refuses permission, the users' freedom would be jeopardized again.
5: The copyleft obligation or the obligation to share one's work in the five freedoms mentioned above.
The copyleft knocks down the original intention of copyright. While normally the copyright implies no obligation for the author and allows almost nothing the user, the copyleft proceeds on the contrary: it allows many things to users, it guarantees the four freedoms and obliges future authors to grant to users of their own improved versions the same rights as those of whom they took advantage themselves. The free character of the work published under GNU GPL licence is then secure for an indefinite future and for any new development. Creatives Commons licenses
What works with software (via GNU GPL licenses) can also make sense for other kinds of work such as texts, images or music. It is the underlying idea in the Creative Commons Project ( DC), that proposes for these works a whole pallet of licenses, among which every author can choose the best one for their needs.
The author can then decide if the copyleft principle here named "Share Alike" is important or not, and if he wants to allow or prohibit its commercial use. There is also an option to prohibit completely any change in the work. So that all Creative Commons licenses do not necessarily give the five freedoms in their entirety.
If we want to keep in mind the actual openness advocated by the GNU GPL license via the Creatives Commons licenses, we will therefore ensure :
that our works are under CC BY SA license
that they are accessible and alterable through free programs (open office or else)
An example to illustrate
Sésamath the current Math teaching network: http://www.sesamath.net/
Created in 2001, Sésamath is a recognized public interest and non-profit association.
Its goal is to favor :
the use of computers in the teaching of Math ;
cooperative work an co-training of teachers ;
the services of support in the students' learnings.
Registered in a process of public service, Sésamath is committed to the values ??of free software. In 2007 and among 68 projects from 51 countries, Sésamath got the 3rd price from the UNESCO for its use of NTIC.
Sésamath distributes free and collaborative textbooks and notebooks for all levels of high school.
On their website dedicated to these works, everyone can download them for free and adapt if they wish.
From the start, Sésamath chose to use free licenses
the GNU FdL (to give a real access to its works' source codes and allow their alteration/modifying)
the CC-BY-SA (to insure virality: pour assurer la viralité: the preservation of works withion commons)
Thanks to this voluntarily very open choice, Sésamath was able to capitalize on the individual contributions of the network's members, to produce more elaborate contents (we shall speak about grade 2 of wealth to - see below) which could then be financially valued. This valuation has allowed the association to perpetuate its activity without losing the first sense of its action: proposing one space of cooperation and skills' mutualization between Math teachers.
On the contrary, a French teachers' network tried the Sésamath experience but failed because from the start, the chosen (or the unchosen) licenses did not allow them to develop their collective productions.
Why do restrictive licenses prevent financial valuation of networks' productions ?
Before going any further, the notion of grades of wealth in a network must be explained. grades of wealth in a network.
In a network's life, several grades of wealth can be observed:
Grade 1: it's the juxtaposition of the individual wealth brought by each member
Grade 2: it's the gathering of the network's derived and coproduced productions (done with the individual wealth of each member)
Grade 3: it's the gathering of derived and coproduced productions done by the network and the networks with which there is a mutualization of Grade 2 wealth.
From grade 2, the produced wealth are generally of sufficient quality that to consider a financial valuation.
Organization chart of a network's life
Grade 1: the networks gets organized and compiles the contributions of its members.
Situation 1
OR members discuss the status of contributions of each and consciously choose to place their contributions in an open license (really open so unrestricted to commercial use - CN of Creatives Commons licenses -)
This implies that anyone who does not agree withdraws its contributions
Situation 2
OR this topic is not clearly discussed and individual contributions are placed under open licence but without the author-members being fully aware of it.
Situation 3
OR members prefer to protect their contributions by a more restrictive license (like Creative Commons license BY NC SA) and therefore no commercial use without permission of the author.
Grade 2: the network grows and produces collective works relying on wealth of grade 1 (the personal contributions of members). These productions are "rich" enough to initiate a financial valuation.
Situation 1
Thanks to open license, collective productions can easily be exploited even if certain members of the network are not present any more! Each having beforehand authorized the valuation of its contributions for the mention of its name and the preservation under open licence. This being also valid if a member of the network seizes grade 2 wealth and sells them... It is true that it will cause tensions within the network and that this membership might not last in the group ... ;-) LIFE
Situation 2
One (or some) members seizes grade 2 productions and sell them.
Author-members feel cheated and try to prevent the sale... which is impossible because grade 1 productions are under open licence.
The networks blows up ! DEATH
Situation 3
The licence not being fully open, the network has to ask each member's (author) agreement for any commercial use of the production.
Most of the time, this step is so complicated that valuation crumbles down and the networks melts with the disappointment of not having experienced the interesting stage of a network (i.e. the collective production and the external valuation of it). DANGER.... DEATH
The strength of Share Alike licenses
Networks having chosen Share Alike open licenses have an important spiral effect.
Their productions being often important and of quality (because they reached more easily the grade 2 of wealth, see Sésamath), they are regularly requested to exchange contents with other close or similar networks.
If these networks have chosen a more restrictive licence (Uncommercial for example) exchange is very difficult because productions of the "open" network (network 1) need to be used or adapted by "the less open" network (network 2) to be shared alike... which means under open licence ! Which forces the "less open network" (2) to make a choice:
or I benefit from the wealth of the open network (1) but then I have to change my less open for the more open licence of network 1 ;
or I don't want to change my licence and I look with envy and despair all the wealth I could have shared and the grade 3 wealth (those highly valuable) we could have created together ;-)
Questions which often occur
I am going to be robbed if I don't put a NC clause
Yet it seems that this non-commercial clause is vague and difficult to interpret.
So, almost every case leads to a particular solution.
In addition, most of our networks do not have the means to engage in a costly legal battle...
Besides the question of the meaning of this action... If I do not want my work to be used for commercial purposes, perhaps it is better not to put it under a Creative Commons license.
Finally, protecting its contents and commercially exploit it can be counter productive.
Indeed, by demonstrating to the private sector that your productions are profitable, you prompt them to use them. Your productions being under a Creative Commons license, these companies can take in and alter your productions to adapt them (with big means that you don't have... even by investing at loss for a few years). Once altered, these productions can be exploited with the help of lawyers and marketing agents and absorb all your market (and then leave you pennyless, which is the contrary of your first aim to make a living with your production;-)
Thus it is better to play on the ground of open licenses, the ground which puts companies ill-at-ease and on which
your association and its suppleness (the move ahead) is more effective.
Besides your freely accessible and alterable work, if good, will interest people, whom happy to use it, will take care of it and maybe help back if necessary (even marketing agents who do not long for your death).
Example: Outils réseaux
Open licenses are not suitable for all
And it's true !
Before considering a particular license, think clearly about your goal !
If it is to live as long as possible on one production, open licenses are not a good choice.
If your goal is not the opening and diffusion of your productions, open licenses are not a good choice.
If your goal is to join the world's overhang, to take part in the diffusion of ideas, of knowledge, to help the development of services around this knowledge... then open licenses are to be explored (because they are a good tool).
Then why pay for the expertise of the plumber?
Very true ! Why do we pay for the plumber's expertise when he gets it from a traditional knowledge ?
First, when you pay the plumber, you mainly pay for his time !
But it's true that we also pay for his skill.
Knowing that the plumber's knowledge is available for free and for everyone because coming from traditional knowledge doesn't make it necessarily "approachable".
Let's imagine that the plumber writes you down an explaining note to replace the siphon of your sink... it's well written and very complete.
Let's imagine that he delivers this note for free (because coming from a traditional knowledge) and that he doesn't charge you for the equipment.
There you are tinkering, following the instructions left by the plumber, but something unforeseen happens. The tap snaps and the flood is threatening...
Guess how much you are ready to pay to have that very plumber back in emergency ;-)
What we are dealing with here is the level of skill that only your plumber has (in any case in the field of plumbing).
There are several levels of skills
level 1: I know it exists
level 2: I am able to do it too
level 3: I can also explain what I am doing
level 4: I am have skills in what I do, I adapt
level 5: I am critical about what I do and I invent from what I know
Your plumber's note take you up to level 2
But your plumber is at level 4 or 5
Which enables him to face unforeseen events and that is the level of skills you pay for, not the traditional knowledge of level 1.
Credits : Creatives Commons and David John Goodger - CC-BY-NC-SA
To begin with : Prezi is an online presentation software. Its peculiarity, compared with classical presentation software such as Impress or Powerpoint, is that the presentation is not linear. The whole of the presentation is on only one space, you reach information by zooming in or zooming out.
Well-adapted to a presentation in a logic of attention (I adapt the presentation to the audience's attention). This notion is the opposite of the logic of intention : I bring my audience from A to B
Allows to organize yourself in a mindmap way or in a linear way.
Downloadable presentation, which means an internet free presentation
The downloaded presentation is self run-time, no presentation software is needed on the computer.
Access to presentation is possible from any internet connected computer
Enables synchronous and asynchronous co-edition
Drawbacks :
In its free version, creation can only be done online
Beware of motion sickness by abuse of rotating effects
English interface
In the free version (except for Education) all presentations can be seen online, there is no private space
Description : To ensure this activity works, it is important to take the method onboard and follow the rules.
There must be three roles:
a presenter: the person presenting the situation or problem
a facilitator - the guardian of the method: who briefly introduces the methodology, gives a reminder of the rules, and ensures everything runs smoothly.
a secretary: the person taking notes (this is shared on Etherpad)
Phase 0: preparation (5 min.)
At the start of the meeting, the group must choose:
a person to introduce the situation-problem: they are advised to prepare the question right from the start based on their reflection on what they see as a difficulty in their professional practice.
a facilitator (guardian of the exercise)
a person to take notes (or a role shared on a pad)
Phase 1 : introducing the problem or the situation (5 min)
The person who has accepted to talk about their problem presents the situation as clearly as possible and explains the background. Then he or she explains how they define the problem. The other members of the team listen.
Phase 2: Clarifying the problem (5 min)
Group members ask any questions they may have to properly understand the situation; during this phase they must stick to questions relating to factual information (to better understand the context, for example). The person who explained the situation then makes the clarifying remarks.
Phase 3: contract - reformulation of the question (1 min)
The person who explained the situation clearly states what he or she expects from the other group members. (I would like the group to help me to....)
Phase 4: reactions, comments, suggestions (20- 30 min)
It is especially the other members of the group who intervene: they give their impressions, reactions, perceptions after assessing and interpreting the situation. They work especially to come up with a different way of looking at the situation, fitting a new framework around it. They can give practical suggestions or give advice.
The person who introduced the situation listens and refrains from intervening. This person is interested in noting down what they thought was important to retain.
Phase 5: Synthesis and action plan (5-10 min)
The person who explained his/her situation takes a few minutes to complete a small action plan with the remarks made by the group members (a personal summary of what he/she retained). During this time, the other participants take notes on the ideas and remarks that may be useful to them in their projects (crosscutting ideas, etc.)
After this time to take notes, the person who explained their situation presents their action plan, indicating how he or she will follow it up. Other members do not discuss the choices of the person or his/her action plan; they simply witness the path this person has decided to take; they can express their support and encouragement. “Crosscutting” ideas noted by other participants are presented after this in a large group.
Phase 6: Evaluation and integrating lessons learnt from the experience (5 -10 min)
To close the meeting correctly, it is convenient to have a recap on what happened. The person who asked for help can explain his or her experience; the group can evaluate how he or she proceeded and, if required, can make corrections for the next meeting. The group is advised to leave some minutes so that each group member can take notes on what he/she has retained from the meeting.
Adapted from : PAYETTE, Adrien and CHAMPAGNE, Claude. Le groupe de codéveloppement professionnel. Québec, Canada : Presses de l’université du Québec, 1997. ISBN 2-7605-0981-8.
To begin with : Skype is a free internet telephony service which enables to have a discussion between two or more persons (with a Skype account). The service proposes also a service of videoconferencing, a chat, screen and file sharing.
Complete tool : audio, video, chat, transfer of files
Free communications between Skype users whatever the distance
Up to 25 persons in the same phone meeting (!)
Drawbacks :
Proprietary software software (Skype's data processing is rather opaque)
The use of Skype is forbidden in a number of firms and administrations
The computer and webcam configuration is sometimes tricky : check it before starting a Skype meeting
Different interface according to platforms : Windows, Linux, Mac, which makes remote repairs difficult
Needs some setting up and a little appropriation of the tool that is not needed with a phone!
Licence :
Proprietary software, Freemium
Using :
Easy
Setting up :
Easy
YesWiki
Card's author : Outils Réseaux
Card's type of licence :
Creative Commons BY-SA
To begin with : YesWiki is a free wiki engine, modular, under GPL licence, which allows to create and manage a website or an intranet. YesWiki is particularly intended for groups wishing to be equipped with an internet-cooperating tool.
Introduction : Just like its dad Wikini, on which it leans, YesWiki allows with any web browser :
the creation, deleting, modifying, commenting of web pages, whatever the number of publishers and of pages.
the management of file system permissions to different pages (read, write, comment), by one or a group of users.
a visual and intuitive laying out of contents, without IT knowledge.
the instantanous publishing of any page creation or modification.
the analysis, the management of the site from simple features : site map, list of users, list of the last modified pages, etc.
YesWiki is also:
templates, adjustable to each site.
the generalizing of the wiki principle to the whole site : modification of the title, banner, menus, footer etc. with a simple double-click.
a flexible antispam.
the ability to join to each page an office or multimedia file with posting or reading of the content for images, sounds, videos, mind maps.
a manager of extensions allowing to add new features such as database, key-words, microblog, shared forecast etc.
YesWiki can be set up on a Web server bearing PHP 5 and more and a database MySQL. Once set up, the site is directly operational and everything is managed online with any web browser.?
Requirements :
Having a PHP / MySQL web hosting
Some practical uses :
it helps to approach existencial matters !
it helps to create a potentially collaborative website easily
it helps to keep the control on the website
it helps to think about the question of power
it helps to set up intranets
it helps to co-write books
it helps to co-build projects
and it helps to demonstrate that project that are co-built are feasible and efficient
it helps to demystify the internet
it helps to do databases even better than a Googleform
it helps to point out the people who really want to cooperate (others say that anyone can change their name)
it helps to spot the IT specialists who see in cooperation safety weaknesses
it helps to remove passwords in order to act
it helps to show that Wiki can also rhyme with pretty
it helps to increase one's skills for the sake of the whole team
flexible (extensions of databases, qrcodes, etc...)
the new features given by extensions offer multiple cooperative possibilities.
easy-to-edit menus
Drawbacks :
Need to know the specific wiki syntax
the"tools" extensions add complexity: be careful to add them when the group is mature enough.
small community of developers.
Licence :
Open sources, Free
Using :
Easy
Setting up :
Reserved for IT Jedis
What we learnt from Cooptic
Hybrid training combining distance and on-site “learning” is an excellent tool for life-long professional development.
However, many conditions are required for this type of training tool to be a real learning ecosystem.
The Cooptic experience has reinforced our convictions regarding certain conditions for training to be successful in the digital era.
Training is no longer a pyramidal transmission of knowledge, where the person that knows passes information down to the person that is learning. It is a co-building of knowledge by networking available information, chosen by the trainers; individual knowledge and experiences that are collectively enriched by reflective exchanges. The training process is rendered explicit by the trainer so that the training provided enables the process of learning to learn.
People are at the centre of the learning process. But these people are easily connected to the world and to others thanks to the new technologies available.
In the training, Cooptic and Animacoop, its French equivalent, we have experienced the construction of learning communities that operate in a similar way to epistemic communities (cf. supra). Trainees publish articles and create training itineraries while gradually becoming active “amateur-experts”. This new quality in people that are training is a real conjunction of intellectual, pedagogical, and even democratic ambitions that really sets the grounds for the pleasure of learning.
The work of trainers changes because it entails several roles in parallel:
“Expert” trainer: is the reference for the subjects dealt with and transfers knowledge.
accompanist: is the person that structures and accompanies the group’s progression in a learning environment based on communication and exchange.
tutor: is the person creating an individualised link with each of the learners helping them to overcome the isolation induced by distance learning.
"technician": is the person that makes sure that all technical devices work properly.
These new "roles" fulfilled by one or more trainers require deep changes:
reconsidering “distance” as a space and time with multiple possibilities for interaction and learning. It is possible to learn, create links, work together and produce a resource in multiple ways:
asynchronous distance contribution based on availability of a space for writing, sharing resources, exchanging via email or a forum,
synchronous distance during video-conferences or exchanging practices between groups,
on-site and distance at the same time…it is possible to organise a course on video-conference with two groups in parallel at two different sites.
making the relationship between trainers, learners and knowledge more horizontal. In the flow of information and exchanges, the trainer is just one element among many others.
adopting the "surf method "1 ....accepting uncertainties and being brave enough to experiment during the process. Trainers are the ones guaranteeing the methodology: they create the balance conditions and do not necessarily master the form of co-production outcomes.
Innovation elements and the effects they have on the training tool and the cooperative learning
How Cooptic innovates
The effect on training
The effect on cooperative learning
Choosing a wiki as a training platform
Technical device that is easy to use with an intuitive configuration and carefully designed graphics. The trainer tries to minimize any possible technical difficulties.
Reduces difficulties for participation. Generates trust in the tools. Creates a feeling of pleasure. Encourages trainees to publish on the NET.
A common space and individual spaces
The wiki platform enables creating personal spaces that are easily linked to a collective support.
Belonging to the learning group is natural (common spaces). Individualised learning is possible (personal space).
Open contents
Courses are posted on-line and are accessible to all outside training times.
Freedom to refer to the courses at all times. Greater availability for activities and exchanges.
Learning contents that extend beyond those in the courses
Posting the course on-line “frees” time to accompany trainees along the process of acquiring skills.
Knowledge acquisition: "learning to learn" and "learning to work with others".
Modular structure
Contents are divided into units (granulated). The general itinerary is defined, but it can be modified during the training.
Building a more personal itinerary is possible.
Systematic approach
Contents are selected so they correspond to the activity as a whole, the collaborative network and to the different levels (individual, group, environment).
Acquisition of global perspective. Relatively complete study of the collaborative processes.
A multiplicity of structured itineraries
Modular course itineraries (the life of a network). Group activities itinerary (learning community). "professional project” itinerary (collaborative environment).
Multiple opportunities to deal with issues on cooperation and collaboration; put them into practice, facilitate them. Analysis of the collaborative process.
Gradual change in the size of work groups
Activities are programmed based on progression: individual exercise, work in pairs, in groups of 4 to 8
Practice on epistemic communities. Exercise on ephemeral groups (change in scale).
Networking and exchanging practices
The activity is conceived as a knowledge aggregator. The trainer provides the methodology.
Valuing experiences as a source of knowledge (reflective practitioner). A particular form of professionalisation (based on the experiences of others). Reinforcing self-esteem.
Co-production of contents
An evolutionary platform: everyone can add pages and text. The trainer accompanies the process and ensures it is consistent.
Active stance towards knowledge. The sense of creating a “common good”.
Notion of "presence" from a distance
A fine-tuned articulation of distance and on-site times. The effort of accompanying is placed on interaction between participants. “Distance” accompanying is systematized (fixed points with the trainers).
The effect of distance decreases or even transformed. Removing project and culture proximity methods.
For further information: epistemic communities
Epistemic communities can be defined as a (small) group of representatives who share a common cognitive aim to create knowledge and a common structure that enables a shared understanding. They are heterogeneous groups. Therefore, one of the first tasks for its members is to create a codebook, a form of "code of conduct", defining the aims of the community and the means to achieve these aims, as well as the rules of collective behaviour. Therefore, what distinguishes an epistemic community is, first and foremost, the procedural authority, that ensures progress towards the established aim while allowing participants a certain degree of autonomy.
The production of knowledge is done based on the synergy of individual specificities. This requires that the knowledge that flows within the community is made explicit. This is done by converting tacit individual knowledge into explicit and collective knowledge: the members of epistemic communities are united by their responsibilities to value a particular set of different knowledge. The aim of the assessment is therefore related to the individual contribution of effort towards a collective aim that is to be achieved, and the validation of the cognitive activity (production of knowledge) of each member is done by their peers based on the criteria established by the procedural authority. The same applies to the recruitment of new members in this type of groups: it is done by the peers, following the pre-established rules regarding the potential in new members to achieve the community’s aim.
Bibliography
Cohendet, P., Créplet, F. et Dupouët, O., (2003), Innovation organisationnelle, communautés de pratique et communautés épistémiques : le cas de Linux. Revue française de gestion, n° 146, 99-121.
1 Rosnay, Joël. Surfer la vie : vers la société fluide. Paris : Les liens qui libèrent, 2012
