Notes from Op3nCare community call 30/5

Present: @Federico_Monaco @LuceChiodelliUB @Costantino @Nadia @Noemi

Please add your notes, I missed the end of the call!

Summary: we got the chance to meet new community member Federico Monaco, catch up on Milano team’s work and their upcoming calendar, and discuss ways to co-organise webinars hosted by starting June. All eyes on WeMake’s first prototype (June-July) and the upcoming Op3nCare Fellows (June 1st)!

Federico is a sociologist, an e-learning designer, interested in following the processes of learning and knowledge construction; hearing about the UDK students he’s interested to meet them - he intends to go to Berlin to do an ethnography of DJs and how they combine an exhausting nightlife with making and designing tech and software.

“When you have certain amounts of words you create a culture of shared language”

With OpenCare: with globalization so many people connected, but so many individuals are disconnected because some community values got lost on their way; healthcare systems has turned care, or healing, or listening (traditionally generated by human feelings) into the scientific rationality of research and professions.

Community of practice= a shared goal of learning performed by a community, with a domain of knowledge, by a practice (check Communities of Practice - A brief introduction by Wenger).

As former administrator of the e-learning platform of a hospital, he noticed that for health professionals - the network, the web means providing information to patients; Federico thinks collaboration in projects like OpenCare would be very useful to students to learn about tacit knowledge and tactics of collaboration and Problem Based Learning by teams. PUNTOZERO is a weblab for health professional students, but open to whoever likes to participate. Learn more here.

Costantino shared updates from Milano: codesign sessions have ended in May; they involved different local communities with diverse needs, presented OpenCare and organised workshops with Arduino to make them understand what kind of prototypes can be made in June-July. Two codesign evening sessions: more or less 20 people (documented here). They decided to work on 3 kinds of obstacles out of 9 propositions and figured out a value proposition sentence:

what will the project to / to solve what / how

Mitigation with the groups who participated: WeMake to run with another prototype in Sept; secondly, they promised the community to publish ideas online so that other projects can go out into the world and maybe someone will join them and help them. Feedback from the prototyping and presentation of the prototypes by the consortium meeting in Stockholm.

Actionable: Still to publish documentation in OpenCare community. Also working on a Playbook: what they are going to do with the prototyping, communication and exploitation (meeting deliverables in June 2016). More prototyping from september 2016 (phase 2).

And we discovered Costantino has an implant in his hand :-)

ActionableOpenCare team to explore partnering up for webinars (in English/and mostly Italian) led by Puntozero and Università degli studi di Parma. This is their current schedule, but Federico seems to keep it flexible:

From PUNTOZERO presentation online here:

Finally, from Edgeryders side: Noemi will be publishing the names of first Op3nCare Fellows Wednesday and wants to make sure all is well at the funder level. However, we may need a consortium meeting for the sole purpose to discuss expenses and funding community/projects and how this fits our formal administrative requirements.

Wed announcement: opencare/Op3nCare fellows

We (UBx, coordinator and the whole consortium, as part of the review process)

will need a document describing the selection process. We already have documents (post, flyer) that more or less describe the criteria to be fulfilled for a submission to be considered, and on which they are individually evaluated. We had mentionned we would need a document additionally documenting the selection process: who was on the committee; what proposals were studied; what proposals were discarded (if there are any and on what basis); how proposals were ranked if that’s the way the process went, etc.

This also links with the Open Call text we must submit as a deliverable – but which happens not to have been submitted yet (probably on the way). But it’s fine since not all submission necessarily enters the frame of the research project – since Op3nCare actually goes beyond opencare (if I understand well).

Communication material: visuals, terminology, etc.

(Putting my coord hat again) Have you guys had a chance to discuss this issue ? I had suggested following posts and comments by @Noemi,  @Natalia_Skoczylas and me about the use of visuals in the newsletter – I had noticed Natalia used a visual part of the comm recommendation style guide while using another terminology (other than the one proposed in the style guide GitHub - opencarecc/opencareStyleGuide: Graphic Guidelines for the project).

We will probably need to save time in Stockholm to discuss and decide how we use the visuals and teminology. Questions that come to mind are: do we wish/need to use distinct visuals and terminologies to distinguish between opencare as a (funded) project involving all partners, and Op3nCare seen as an EdgeRyders initiative (my vision of things might be wrong, please adjust if you feel I am mislead); are newsletters part of Op3nCare and/or opencare ? Etc.

To me these are in a sense difficult questions: although we know the two projects are distinct, the border between them is fuzzy (which can be seen as being quite natural and a good thing).

Yes, newsletter decision on my personal agenda points.

Thanks for the heads up. The discussion is indeed too long and uninteresting to have here. So will decide together and then comply :slight_smile:


“although we know the two projects are distinct, the border between them is fuzzy (which can be seen as being quite natural and a good thing).”

@melancon @Alberto @Rossana_Torri @markomanka @Lakomaa

We really need to talk about this (and I’m not reffering about graphics or futile things) during the Steering comitee.

Dealing with this mess it’s counterproductive IMHO.

More during the Cons Meeting days


I believe there is an overlap between the two. I do recognize it makes things harder to manage.

We will surely discuss about it. I sincerely hope everyone will come with a constructive mindset on this issue.

1 Like