 Bonjour. Good morning. Welcome. Day three of what's become a very wonderful conference. Thank you all for being here and participating and contributing to a very engaging couple of first days. I'm Paul Stacey, the executive director of Open Education Global and co-host with the University of Nantes of this conference. It's my great delight to welcome you to day three after another wonderful social evening last night. Thank you for our hosts helping make that happen. The first two days were very interesting keynotes with the first person speaking about open in the context of outer space. Something we don't often talk about in the open education community. And then yesterday, after Cian Proctor's day one keynote, we heard from Andrea Rose, who ran to be president of Ecuador. And it was wonderful to hear from someone who's a politician and can articulate the value of open and how it might be implemented politically and strategically within a national framework. And it's wonderful to today move from outer space to a national effort around open education to an institutional effort, which is equally as challenging as the other two. And so it's my great privilege to welcome Karine Bernal and her team from the University of Nantes to talk to us in this third keynote about how open is being implemented strategically here at Nantes University. And I expect this will be highly relevant to many of you at your respective institutions. Karine is a lawyer and her research in the past has been about open access. She held a number of positions here at the university before declaring interest herself in becoming president of the university. And here in France, the president would be the equivalent of a rector or chancellor at other universities. In her program and her expression of interest in being president, she declared open education and open education resources as a landmark and goal of her mandate as president of the university. She's brought with her team, and I look forward to hearing all of your various perspectives on how this can be implemented at an institutional level. And lastly, many of you know me from the past as having worn red converse all-stars all the time. And last month when I was here on a site visit and was invited to visit Karine in her office, I just delighted in seeing that she too wears converse all-stars. So welcome Karine and team. Please, over to you. Thank you very much, Paul. Hello everyone. You have understood that it is indeed a collective intervention with a few colleagues from Nantes University. I really want to thank you. I would like to present them to you as part of this intervention. This morning, Paul remembered what happened the days before, the two keynotes before. You probably wonder quite legitimately what a president of the university did after an astronaut and after a minister. Succession is a bit rough. The question is quite legitimate. Paul already explained a bit about this choice. I can tell you how happy I am to be in front of you this morning with our colleagues to talk to you about a subject that is particularly important to me, the one about the opening of access to knowledge in the most important sense. It is almost a common place to say that access to knowledge is a key to transformation of society. Yes, it is a common place and at the same time, it is a common place that needs to be recalled, repeated, reaffirmed. In any case, it is a deep conviction. And indeed, as Paul said, it is one of the elements, of the arguments that led me to become president of Nantes University today and to make them, in any case, our university, an open university. We will have the opportunity, of course, to tell them to come back and it is also the reason for which we are so happy to welcome Open Education Global in Nantes since Monday. So this political choice to place access to knowledge at the heart of a political project for Nantes University, we are going to come back to it, but first of all, and Paul mentioned it quickly, it is first of all the result of my personal journey. Indeed, it is true that I am a lawyer, a law teacher, I am a lawyer specialist. And when I started my career as a research teacher, it is naturally that I reproduced the practices of my years, that is to say, I began to publish articles in legal magazines without asking any questions at the time. And then a few years later, I fell, honestly, by chance at the end of a lecture on the term open access. I did not know what it was. And so I started to dig into the subject of legal language, obviously, tropism, and therefore in connection, especially with the practice of contradictions and the recourse to contradictions. You have to know that in France, there was almost no legal publication devoted to this question of open access, the opening of knowledge. And in my discipline, more particularly, it was a question that was unknown to most colleagues. So I jumped into the subject, you understood, to explore the legal consequences. So, in other words, it was first an object of research. Finally, for me, this question. It is, by the way, that I was already interested at that time in the free law, in Creative Commons license, and therefore in a certain way, in the philosophy that supported the open access that was not unknown to me, and which is particularly interesting when it comes to the use of copyright. Because I often said to my students, when I had them, that the right of copyright is what the author does. That is to say, the right of copyright allows us to prohibit the use of the new than to authorize it. Historically, the right of copyright has been used for a long time to prohibit use. For a few years, we have seen an inversion and more and more situations where we used copyright to largely authorize the use of the works. So this movement that you know of this sharing, obviously, when we are lawyers and specialists of these questions, it is quite fascinating. But obviously, very quickly, and you will see what is leading me today in front of you with my colleagues, very quickly this research work has necessarily led me to question my own practices as a researcher. And so first, I discovered the open archives. Open archives that gave access to scientific publications from all over the world, for free. It is a number to be passed through here. It is an open, it is a mine, we dive in it and it is a gift, but almost as quickly in my discipline. In any case, I noticed that most of the articles that were accessible were in English and most were from colleagues, researchers from North American universities. So it was great because I did not have access before, so it was great. And at the same time, it inevitably asked our ability to think in other ways, so in a certain way, other cultures. And at the same time, I had conversations I worked a lot with the Francophone Africa at the time, always a little, and I had conversations with colleagues, with doctors of Francophone Africa, all jurists, who reinforced these questions. Simply, some of them asked me, but where is the French archive? Where are the French articles on the open archives? And they insist immediately that this proposal concerns legal disciplines. Fortunately, that other colleagues in other fields, in France, published and published already on the open archives. It was not the case. And so, obviously, I was aware of this famous paradox that you all knew, that public money finances twice the search, it finances the research itself and it finances the access to the results of its research, by paying the subscription to the review. And so, of course, a logic of public service, I will come back, it is something that needs to be asked. And so, in this context, I started to look to evolve my search practices in the access to my publications. And so, for each article, for each cover, the editors offered me contracts that provided, like all my colleagues, that I had to help them, the integrity of my copyrights plus 70 years, which is still quite long. And so, in short, the option was refused or accepted, no negotiation. And so, in the case of refusal, it was to broadcast the articles directly online, for free, certainly, but with a very reduced lectorate containing my discipline's practices. So the time I did at the time which is certainly very questionable, there would be nothing, it was to continue to publish in its reviews by talking about open access, by talking about access to knowledge, by talking about open access to make this subject exist. At the same time, fortunately, the French government started to answer the question. What led to a really important text in France, on this subject, is the law for a digital republic, adopted in 2016, which includes an article that allows all researchers to broadcast their article 12 months after the publication in a review, whatever the content of the contract of the edition. Plangeurilic is a very interesting discussion. So you may have doubted it, I got it wrong for my own publications, but the impact remained quite limited. And I find that at that time, I was directing one of the research laboratories of the university, the private research institute. And so, in my position as director of the laboratory, I tried, with the support of our common documentation service, my colleagues with these questions. In particular, I had created, at the time, a collection of the laboratory in the French archives, an online hyper-article. So it was not simple at all. We left very far away, you understood it. My colleagues said, it was nice, good looking, they listened to what I told them, but the effects were still quite reduced. What appeared right away, as soon as I began to want to talk about the subject and my colleagues, is that the issue was, first of all, about this issue. The open science, it is the same thing for open education, it is the end of the world of habits, of the use. And so, we had to take the time to explain why, how we could contribute to the open science. Moreover, others, also aware of a certain way at that time, you understood that I only addressed to lawyers in this laboratory, and yet I was able to measure the difficulty, for non-specialists of law enforcement, to really understand the Creative Commons licenses, to understand their content, their meaning, the different options proposed, and therefore to make a clear choice to associate a license to the resources that were put online. So there too, a lot of pedagogy work, even with the lawyers. And then the other difficulty, which appeared very quickly, and which is part of the subjects that we have always worked on, is the question of time. So, the registration of data on the open archive, to the files, we will come back to it when I say the time, you understood that in reality I am talking about the lack of time. In short, at that time, I hope to have been able to put a few small grains in the mind of a few colleagues, but there too, the results were quite minimal. And so finally, from that time, what seemed quite obvious, is that, to really change the data on these subjects, it was necessary that the subject be brought at the level, of course, at the level of all the establishment, and therefore of the whole university. And then, I find that a few years later, due to a constant competition that I have to share with you, I found myself in a situation to be a candidate for the presidency of the university. It was not planned, and so I asked myself, why did Diable Jéré embark on such an adventure, and among the arguments that were made, that were made in my decision to bring me candidates, to figure out the possibility to bring a policy of opening access to knowledge. In a general way. So it seems limited to scientific publications, even if you have understood that on these subjects, it is by then that I finally did in some way my learning, where I had this awareness. And so, as Paul said in the introduction, it is indeed one of the axes of the project that we carry with the team for the public service of knowledge. We even inscribed these issues in the definition of the doorstep of a few vice-presidents. Renaud Ghevel, who is there, training and open education. Olivier Grasse, not with us this morning, he is moving, but who is our vice-president research. Vice-president research and open science. So we inscribed in some way from the start, in some doorsteps, these issues that we all wanted to carry for our establishment. And fundamentally, these are the values that are carried by this movement for the opening of access to knowledge my commitment and the commitment of the whole team. Favour to spread, to share, to circulate knowledge, to make access to everyone free of charge. For me, this is the foundation of the public service. This is the foundation of what should be and what should naturally be a university. Knowledge created through public money must be free of charge and yet we are there. Because the stakes are multiple and you know them as well as I have mentioned some already cultural linguistics, there is also the question of scientific progress, social progress, which are obviously in play. And obviously on all these subjects, but you know what science has been giving for a few decades now, it is digital. Digital gives us the opportunity more than ever in our history to make knowledge circulate quickly, for free. We are still far from the utopia of universal access to knowledge. In some countries, still today, there are only 6% of the population who have access to electricity. According to UNESCO, there are 117 million students in the world who are not schooled. You see that we are far from the utopia that I mentioned earlier. The most important part of knowledge, the largest possible, is perhaps more necessary than ever. More necessary than ever, while the denial of the word scientific progress, while false information spread. And in my opinion, in our sense, what we have with all the team, is also the responsibility of the universities to engage on this front there, even if it is a little war, it is very important. And so this question of access to knowledge is also inscribed in some way the DNA of Nantes University. Because Nantes University is a university that is all new, that is all young, it only exists since January 1 of this year, so for almost 5 months. So it rests in two words on a model that is unprecedented in France, that is to say that Nantes University was created by the former university of Nantes with a national health research organization, the INSERM, with the Nantes University Hospitality Center, with the Institute of Technology Research, and with three schools that were outside the university, which are now in the university, an engineering school, Nantes Central School, Nantes University Art School, and the Nantes Architecture School. And so we were able to write the status of Nantes University. And as I was president of Nantes University, I was in charge of this work, and so we have actually inscribed these in the status of Nantes University. Just to quote you two steps, it's very short to be able to give you a look, we have inscribed in the preambule this issue first, by saying that Nantes University promises the access to all to knowledge, forms of enlightened citizens, develops research and innovation to share knowledge, spread scientific culture, contribute to the critical reflection of the world and be an actress of this one, especially in terms of issues related to sustainable development. And then in the body of the status, we have an article that is devoted to access to knowledge. And I quote you, it's very short, the development of the common goods of knowledge is one of the key elements of social progress. It is important to bring its contribution to this essential objective, Nantes University is committed to in favor of open science, and open innovation to make accessible knowledge to all. Obviously, when we talk about status, preambule and article, we can say that all of this is declarative, symbolic, certainly, but symbols are important. And symbols are important, especially when we create a new university. It doesn't happen so often to create a new university. And so, I couldn't imagine that it doesn't exist in the statuses. But in a way, the political base on which our action, our commitment today, in favor, you understood it of a transversal approach of openness, science, education, innovation, but also, we're going to talk about it, it was mentioned yesterday also during the keynote in the government mode of our establishment. And so, we're going to come back on each of these points with the colleagues who will accept to join me this morning to share some of the elements with you and then, of course, to start the discussion. The first subject, perhaps, to talk about is open science. So, in terms of open science, our administration council adopted, a year ago, just a month ago, a deliberation related to open science. By supporting the opportunity offered in France by the law for a digital republic that I have already talked about and therefore in the framework decided to generalize the open access to publications by imposing an obligation to depot of all scientific articles in the open archive that I mentioned earlier, hyper-article in line AL. It is an obligation that is adopted on incitative measures. So, concretely, for example, for the institutional evaluations of our laboratories, today, we only take into account the publications that are referred to in the open archive. We can also adjust the dotations of the laboratories based on the percentage of accessible documents on the open archive. Here are the levers. So, you also understand, we made the choice of the green voice of the open archives, considering that the higher-paying system that you know does not deeply change and really the model of diffusion of scientific publications. Before talking about the subject, I would just insist on one point that is open, especially and even more generally access to knowledge. If we were able to put this device on the open science, it is thanks to the commitment for several years of all our common documentation service. And I really want to insist on this point that it is essential. Our colleagues from the libraries today administer our portal in the open archive, the Nantes University portal, but above all, they have deployed a whole series of services to the researchers, the laboratories. Help to the depots, hand-picked by the open archive, accompanying the laboratories in the management of their collections, training also, have been put in place for the doctors, for example. So, it is a whole set of devices to accompany this decision and, I insist, the libraries really have a role essential to play in the matter. And so, as I was saying to address this topic, I will now pass the floor to a colleague, Mathilde Labé, who is a teacher of researchers at Nantes University in French literature, and who is also a scientific responsible for the platform of data Humanum Loire for the House of Man's Science in Jiggyepin. Mathilde. I would first like to thank Karine Bernaud for inviting me to take the floor. It is a great pleasure to be able to evoke the activity of our laboratories which, as Karine said, researchers as public institutions are facing new challenges for publishing their work. For example, to take into account the rights to reproduce and reuse of their objects and their production, or to formulate the corresponding metadata in a language that is both interdisciplinary and international. In fact, it modifies research practices in their entirety. Data management has taken an important role in the condition of possibility of open science. To evoke this, I will first take the example of the LITEP project that I coordinate. LITEP means the literature in the public space. We notice that the public space uses, among other things, a large part of the literature to structure and impose itself on its users. And we analyze the principles of this use. What are the authors? What are the characters represented in the public space? Why are they chosen? We have created a database of literary monuments, which you can see here, to study this question, to review the marks of the presence of the writers, of the monuments, of the commemorative plates, of the names of places in the public space and to study the way these traces take part in the construction of local or national identities. For example, Jules Verne who was born in Nantes and who died in Amiens but also in the city of Vigo, in Spain. However, he is not represented by a monument in Paris. Why? Through the relational graph that you see on the screen, we also analyze the role of these commemorations in the literary environment and in these relations with the political life and the economic life. Our project mobilizes university researchers, of course, but also departmental archives, libraries, housewives, friends' societies. We therefore had to ensure the interoperability of the data and the compatibility of the exhibition rights of the documents that were provided to us. Here on the screen, you have the reproduction of a photograph of the inauguration of the statue of Lamartine in 1086 which belongs to the background of the BNF, an absolutely fantastic mine. We worked during all the duration of the project to make sure that the basis of the data is conformed to the principle of doing, findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable. At the MSH in Jeguépein, we are lucky to have two platforms dedicated to storage, treatment and data analysis, which are humanum Loire, which you see here, and project of Loire, two local platforms which make the link with national infrastructures and which accompany researchers in three great transformations in the first place, in the integration of data management at the work of research, data management planning. Today, the big research finance agencies demand all of their teams that they rationalize before even collecting the storage and the transmission of data. It is so much more important when projects take place of participative science. This case, for example, for the Recital project on the right of the Diapo, this project is based on the crowd sourcing, the implication of the general public in the research. This crowd sourcing has brought a considerable help to the project which deals with 26,000 pages, I believe, of the theater accounting record. It is actually to study the material history of the theater to encode these pages to see what are the different categories of the public or how they were paid and to whom the rights of the authors are finally the elements that teach us the rules that frame the representations. All of this teaches us the material life of the theater and you see here the contribution interface which is offered to the internautes who want to participate. The project today has 1,866 contributors who are, for the most part, anonymous to make 217,000 marks in these records. This implies, of course, to adapt the reading procedures and harmonization of all of these data but also to federate this community of contributors. This evolution in the management of sources and in the storage of the results allows and supposes new forms of publication and scientific vulgarization. This is a central question and that is why several days we were organized on this subject this year. We have thus been able to reflect on the interest of the data papers which allow to expose both the collection, the structuring and the interpretation of the data. We have also thought about the functions of the review epi which relies on the open archive of all the successive versions of the same article until the final version. But we are also interested in the form of the restitution of the results which can affect the general public. The Vespace project which you have a presentation on the right of the Diapo is a real model in the matter because it allows everyone to discover the marionettes of the 18th century of course disappeared and to understand their functions thanks to virtual reality rather than a long speech. It was presented at different events of science on the innovative day and on social media, etc. The work on the restitution technologies in virtual reality in a general way is a strong access of interdisciplinary research. We can clearly see here that developing a tool is a result as much as the collection and interpretation of the data. To conclude, there is the last letter of the FAIR. It is a beautiful objective but to pass reusable data to actually reused data we need more than interoperability standards. We need active research networks and that is what we want to build. In the past, these data are not only images not only transcriptions, content or archives not only quantitative or geographical data are also source codes. You see here around the pictogram indicating that the source code of the project presented is accessible on the Githlab entrepot that we are many to use. We have developed a group of reflections on this subject which brings together human and social scientists from all over the world and which is called Society of Digital Humanities presented to you here. Many projects put together this circulation of data and for some it is a really ambitious part. I would like to mention the Subwork project of production which reuses personal and confidential data by transforming them into open data thanks to various compromises to anonymize them without losing too much information. For a long time, we knew as a researcher the need to make the public the collected data but it was difficult to leave existing data games. The first reason is that the access is theoretically possible and sometimes technically complex. The second reason is that until recently, innovation was almost always synonymous with new fields and yet it is rare that a research project which is necessarily limited in time and then in total the potential of its own collection. Hence the interest to be able to transmit the data so that the first results can be increased by other teams. It implies a real change and we are very happy at Nantes University to have been able to set up the tools to make it possible. Thank you very much Mathilde on this subject of access to research data which is a very vast subject which is particularly complex. You know, we also opened it at the level of the establishment which storage for which data Mathilde has just mentioned so there is a work that runs with pilot laboratories to identify the needs of this subject. So for open science, open education. We have to be honest, we go further than on open science on this subject. The subject is even less known we have even more pedagogies to do after we have the chance at Nantes and you know to have a great demonstrator with the chair of UNESCO which is carried by Colin de la Igheira who is dedicated to free educational resources and artificial intelligence which you talked about earlier that vice president in charge of training and open education works on these questions and I pass them the floor to Arnaud. Thank you Karine. Hello dear colleagues. So indeed Nantes University open and sustainable as our president specified is engaged in open knowledge with a political commitment which is completely affirmed which is based on at least three pillars or our three fundamental missions that are research, teaching and innovation and I will of course be interested in this little sequence of open education since this this action is included in the perimeter of my function. So indeed there are four goals of sustainable development of the United Nations and UNESCO recommendations for an accessible education to the world but this ambition we bring it as the president just said because among us we have this dear UNESCO free educational resources and artificial intelligence carried by Colin and the dear actually contributes actively to create pedagogical innovations to the creation and sharing of free educational resources but also the commitment of Colin within open education Global has allowed us to welcome you today and since Monday and it is a real pleasure and an honor to have you here all of you to share to hear your experience the work developed in your universities but I hold here since I have this little time at the tribune to thank particularly Colin for having allowed us to welcome you this distant event in October 2021 present since Monday indeed also allows us to affirm this intention of contributing to an open education is a university that counts in this landscape for the coming years and all the communication here will inspire us and feed our actions certain that I will share this morning with you so we have created with six other universities the European University, UNIWELL we are today eight members who are echoing the concept of the Buen Bibir which has been so elegant and through an exceptional conference presented yesterday by the Minister Andrea Arous who left us but which I also thank for the values he brought around the opening but also the contribution of the march to a society modern and democratic Universities of UNIWELL have signed a declaration about the intention of developing the open education and also signed jointly the declaration of Captain which shows the commitment of UNIWELL, political commitment but which is already materialized and some concrete actions that are led within our European University so a little sharing of our vision of the open education which does not of course and as you bring it also to the production of free educational resources but beyond so first within an establishment and in an essential university today we have a platform like Moodle where the pedagogical resources produced by teachers are available only to students in their courses and we intend to open this Moodle platform which would be called Open Madock so that the resources are available to 42,000 students but also to all of our staff without exception apart in certain pedagogical situations which deserve or impose the confidentiality in sharing to a particular group of students the second level consists in the opening of certain resources to a partner circle to French universities foreign universities and of course in the UNIWELL perimeter as I just mentioned since we are currently developing new training courses D'Amblé designed in our open education we also have narrow links with digital universities present here since Monday and we also want to intensify this and then there is this third level which concerns sharing and the creation of free educational resources spread on an accessible platform to all in the service of quality training for our students to improve their success and make our training more attractive so for this and to engage this approach as the president said as we go further we are supported on expertise advice and collaboration of our colleagues and friends Christine Jackmo and Yves Deville who are in the room with us since Monday from the Catholic University of Louvain and their expertise is precious to us to advance to Grandpas so we are in a final stage although we carry out actions and I will not quote this morning but they are concrete through the chair but beyond but we finalize an action plan which will soon be submitted to our institutions our first objective is to sensitize and encourage our communities and the conference of Global Education which holds these days an important step for us since we carry out around this event actions of communication and sensitization then we will also form the community of the staff and students to form the staff by supporting for example training modules created in the event of a collaboration UNESCO Relia carried by Colin de la Higuera and colleagues from the University of Rabat in Morocco and also by developing tools or by putting them at your disposal curing tools to help our colleagues to create teaching content this is what allows the tool to be developed by the chair UNESCO in the event of a project called MECLARA but also the students must be trained trained because it is important to give them curing tools in the event of a collaboration with NetTech and Flex it will be possible for some promotions and within some training what will allow them to better select content and the information on the internet what they already practice by mobilizing research engines but without qualitative filter we also work on the structure of the training to produce free educational resources the example of the REL factory carried by the University of Sherbrooke has inspired us for several months and we have the intention to develop this model that we are in the process of creating so we have also for several months identified more than 20 training initial and continuous of all levels of different disciplinary scientific domain carried by our schools our institutions which will be real demonstrators that we will transform or create by applying the open education these demonstrators have vocation to allow us to present them as an example and the approach will be assimilated to other training modules or other training later we will also develop the immersive learning by creating a platform dedicated to free free educational resources in collaboration with France Immersive Learning and especially Nicolas Dupin who has been here since Monday and who in his exposure yesterday for part has mentioned this project during a session held in this auditorium we are convinced that the virtual reality is increased and must constitute a technology at the service of our practices and especially for the learning of complex gestures in chirurgies for example but also why not develop technical and technological skills in very complex environments like cyclotrons like around an airbus these are examples chosen of course with the presence of this Aronax cyclotron from CHU Norlennek and the presence on the territory in Nantes and in Saint-Nazaire of the Arbus company so finally we also actively work on the development of our digital environments with a demand for sustainable development I want to say of course and to guarantee access to free free educational resources we have issues of interoperability of technical issues not simple but it is what is currently engaged for a few weeks within the University of Newwell and to finish I want to take a meeting with you and to tell you that I hope we will have the opportunity during DOEG 2023 at Northwest College to present to you some of our achievements in any case our conviction is full and our actions are certainly committed others will contribute to what the open education is carried out by Nantes University thank you Arnaud you understood that in the same state of mind we are also looking to deploy the open and collaborative innovation with the idea that it is a way to address the impact of our research on society and also we have a big work to do because it is a subject that is even less known than the open education we also have the chance to have examples of success and demonstrators I think especially the work of our colleague Patrick Le Calais who was rewarded by an Emmy Award by the Engineering Technology and so on this subject I will leave the floor to Frédéric Jacques-Main who is vice president of Nantes University who is in charge of innovation and Lucille Colombain hello everyone we are both talking about this subject so I want to talk about innovation and the particular road we are going around the open innovation today innovation is devoted to our research work to our initial and continuous training today what we are trying to say is that innovation can also be a gateway for university and innovation can finally generate research work and mobilize our training to see their revolution so it is true that innovation is the third mission of universities research is the training and we often talk about an RFI research innovation in France, the Ministry of Education the research of information and innovation so we are finally proposing to change paradigms and to put innovation as this entry door of the university this entry door is already present in many universities of course it is also present in Nantes but we want to accelerate the process I think there are some British universities in particular in Edinburgh in Edinburgh, citizens are able to attribute the status of an innovator in residence I think this is something that we also have to go to Nantes so in front of the big challenges of society which are by nature pure and disciplinary and transverse these big challenges finally train in the first in the first time often of the issues of innovation of a large number and finally also sit the place of the university in particular in the university but also of your universities in the life of the citizen of the usage and of the territory this innovation finally allows us to mobilize different laboratories of different disciplines to play on the interdisciplinarity necessary to raise these big challenges of society but also to question our training or our training modes so this approach which I was talking about research, training, innovation we can also talk about a complementary approach which is an innovation approach research and training so the open innovation constitutes a formidable lever in this context this forces us to review our organization of project governance to place collective issues as necessary and to ensure the mixity of the actors of the innovation process it is also the opportunity to place the university or the world of the university at the heart of the actions and as a real place of experimentation so thus the open innovation allows us to converge researchers' expectations of the actors of the socio-economic world of the users facing the great challenges of society I would like to say a few words about the interest of both our community but also the companies where users and citizens have to go towards this type of approach for our researchers our personal researchers it is the possibility to access the field of experimentation and users it is also the possibility to develop an interdisciplinar expertise in a phase with the expectations of the territory important the place of the university or the territory but also the expectations that go beyond the national territory and that go at the European level or international concerning the socio-economic actors I think in the world of companies it is possible to integrate in a collective approach to also make inter-entrepreneurship relations of course to make the capacity that can mobilize an university like ours and of course for the users, and I would let Lucille talk about it more for the users it is the capacity to be an actor of innovation approach to be in contact with a university world for which they are quite far away and to participate in a collective approach Lucille will be a bit more pragmatic than me and I think it is the initiative that we set and which shows the interest of working collectively on these innovations Hello everyone I am the operational director of a regional program on the experience of the users which is carried by non-university and co-animated with the school of design in Atlantique and I am here to present to you an original model of innovation in 2021 So in fact we wanted to structure and accelerate collaborative work on the users and on the user experience as a changing lever of behavior in a transition context and for that we have imagined a new format which are inter-disciplinary innovation programs which are innovation research consortiums of a duration of 3 years which respond to several conditions First of all they respond concretely to one or several challenges of transition which are very concretely incarnated on the territory associated with socio-economic and researchers and mobilized several disciplines that is very important for us because it is really an inter-disciplinary approach so in particular science, whether it be human and social sciences or technical sciences but also on the side of design or creation disciplines that are in particular the design and that is to be able to propose a continuum of skills of design to the prototyping, experimentation and evaluation of new products, services or spaces These consortiums must generate knowledge on the user experience and transitions and finally it is very important experimentation is at the heart of these steps between disciplines, actors who have different temporalities different stakes socio-economic actors are made up because they co-finance at a height of 50% they also bring experimentation fields users I will talk about and collaborators researchers obviously bring their scientific expertise but also access to platforms in particular in our case evaluation of user experience and then we come with public funding of the region to support the implementation of experiments on the field to multiply and their number and finally we support the operation of these consortiums so there are three projects that have been supported to this day a first on the inclusive habitat shared with young autistic people supported also by the foundation of the university of artificial intelligence and a third that I will present in more detail on patient experience ah ok ok so this project patient experience evaluation lab it attacks the question of transitions in health paths which are both marked by a complexification of ultra-specialization but also of growing digitization and by strong social expectations like actors of their own health but also actors of the health system this collective this consortium is set for objective of experimenting to propose methodologies of evaluation and innovative conceptions of health experience which allows to call on the experience of patients so we have in this consortium three agents, three socio-economic actors which are agents of design and architecture which regularly intervene on health issues and then two laboratories even if we have more researchers than that but two laboratories or researchers of two main laboratories in design and in digital science so I will present very concretely an experiment because it will also allow you to understand how the experiment allows to make the link between all of these elements so it's an experiment around a project of new neodatology which is carried by the CHU of Nantes and which already implies the design agency without a hypothesis in the consortium this experiment will allow to compare the two versions of the chamber by coupling several approaches of the patient's experience this type of experimentation in fact it has several benefits it allows the researchers to access terrain concrete challenges and also to have a direct social impact for socio-economic partners it's a set of skills of course for the field of experimentation it's also the possibility to access scientifically valid results so the contribution of these results from the experiments it allows the publication, of course dissemination and it causes the interest of other actors internally and externally I will also give you some some elements on the operation of the organization of a particular level so we have been able to see that there are several levels of interest and of involvement on the one hand we have founders who contribute to the activity of studies of experimentation, who participate in the government we have field who are partners who offer environments of experimentation and who can be customers of socio-economic actors who are founders we have a different model the one I mentioned supported by the foundation the field of experimentation are directly the founding members so there are no intermediary actors what is interesting to see is that all of the leading parties form a community which is created, which is achieved this community shares results it contributes to the global reflection and also to promotion and dissemination of knowledge and it's important the management of industrial property which is a sensitive subject we know that when we talk about open innovation it can be totally free in some cases, in what we have seen or it can be restricted according to the cases in terms of teaching and perspective we have seen that this type of open innovation is interested both researchers and socio-economic actors to be able to lead collective work and interdisciplinary so it's a federative dynamic that works, it was in Paris at the beginning and we are happy to see that it works we don't have any universal model of organization and no universal model of sharing collective work of knowledge we may have in a few years a little more of retreat we have other activities to explore it's planned in the leaflet of several of these programs but they are very recent so it hasn't been implemented yet in particular in terms of validation and dissemination the creation of pedagogical support of white books, of training modules of MOOCs which can be widely open both to the professionals of the represented sectors but also to the citizens these consortiums also give us the capacity to position ourselves as a national and international project through this collective expertise collectively created questions are asked of course in terms of perennization and which strongly affect the opening because on the one hand it works because there is a collective animation which today is financed by public funds so how do we maintain this dynamic in a perennial way which needs to be valued in a relatively short term their investment to be able to continue to invest in a recurrent way in this type of program so there is clearly a new economic model also to be invented between public actors private actors for my part Frédéric I think you want to conclude in fact in a few seconds the idea is to place the innovation as a gateway this approach finally allows us to activate our force in search of removing the great challenges which are present in the international world so we also have through this open innovation access to the field of experimentation this field of experimentation closest to users and citizens in connection with the companies finally allows us to increase our knowledge to have a very interdisciplinary approach and then of course the impact that a university must have on the company materializes with this type of approach thank you so you understood to end the question of the open government which I already mentioned last morning during the keynote maybe the universities in France are based on a democratic function that is to say that we have instances where people and students sometimes majorly, sometimes exclusively so the place of external personalities is important but in any case it remains minority and the presidents of the university are elected elected by their independent father to the government so we have a function that relies on a representative democracy which is very important we are attached and at the same time the constant we have been doing for several years not only universities maybe it's not enough for what concerns us universities have grown the staff and the students often feel distant from the decision spaces instances that I mentioned at the moment we feel that they all escape and so too often university democracy is reduced finally every 4 or 5 years to go vote to constitute the instances at the time of the president's election and so the idea is to say that to strengthen the university well, you have to strengthen in complement of the representative democracy and so finally adopt the principles of the government that were mentioned yesterday morning which relies on two words if you want to summarize transparency and participation and so in 2020, as soon as my election I created a mission an independent mission dedicated to this subject of university democracy which was entrusted to a colleague a politician professor of universities at Nantes University who will talk to you about his work Arnaud Thank you Karine, hello everyone the starting point I believe of this question is the university on the historical level works on a principle of collegiality only this collegiality as time goes by it is often reduced to the collegiality of the only professors until before 1968 and today we are at a mass university and a mass university but also a lot of research teachers with very different status and varied recognitions a lot of personal support with different statuses in a certain way we have to reinvent a wide collegiality much more inclusive and much more operational but we have in front of us a tendency contrary to the other which has been identified by the research in France by the work of the sociology of organizations at Sciences-Paris of the university governance and this tendency is that since about 25 to 30 years we see in the French universities which are derogatory which are normalizing we see a verticalization to be put in place the presidences of the university become very powerful professionalized and this induces a kind of fossing between the university community to be a basic university whether it be students, researchers or personal support and then the political direction of establishment there is a lot of implications a certain failure of the intermediate hierarchy a decrease in collective weight and we have to add since 10 years the fact that the initiatives of excellence or varied names in France have led to an acceleration of a form of polarization in many sites in France these initiatives have led literally to strong tensions between the field and the directions I have the habit of saying for many members of the university community the political objectives that assign the direction of the university are planes that go 10,000 meters above their heads and so one of the difficulties is since we are looking to reinvent some part of the university we also have to reinvent its functionality modality internal this is the game of this democracy mission in a certain way to reflect and try to propose a series of solutions there are three key principles that have been acted since the start the first is an independent mission it does not take away the political direction of establishment it takes away from something that looks like what we would call in French an independent administrative authority what we would call in English something like an ombudsman the second thing is that it is also a creation of a very politically supported authority and it is important because it will allow to occupy sensitive, visible and major files and then the third thing this mission aims to consolidate the representative democracy by using other tools and other logic and not to to bypass it or to avoid it so what are the roles there is a framework that has been fixed I would say in practice how it works it is very simple a student institution in the university whether it is responsible for faculty president of the university or a collective institution an administration council etc this mission is a problem and once we are seized we will study and discuss with the actor of the nature of the problem to envisage what are the types of democratic responses that we can put in place to respond it gives us a first report written which is given to this person who has seized us or to this authority who has seized us and which aims to make a precondition the authority in question it is then absolutely free to follow the precondition or not and once this precondition is fulfilled we enter into the second role of this mission of the university democracy a role of support throughout the implementation the implementation of yere if you have to choose Member States if you have to technically elaborate things you'll have to do it and also to do a whole work and control of the neutrality of the processes that arise from the whole community. If we set up consultation processes, we need to have guarantees on where the data can be manipulated, etc. And so this is the job of the mission. The job of the mission is also to do the analysis of the collected data and to make a report that will then be submitted to the authority knowing that this report aims to enlighten it, to give it a sort of mapping of arguments. You will see that logic is chosen. It is above all a logic that aims to determine where are the points of expression, what are the arguments that can bring the community. It is above all that that interests us. It is a very deliberative and very argumentative logic. We do not try to measure statistically a strong relationship as if we were to proceed with a vote or referendum. The whole of the tools we have are tools rather than tools to measure the points of tension, to propose different arguments in a way that the authority that has to decide is better armed on the argumentative plan. The last role that we have, and this one for the moment is not yet very elaborate because there was the COVID-19 pandemic, it is a work of animation, of intellectual and scientific animation around what is that, the university democracy, what has been experimented here and there, in France and elsewhere, what works and what does not. A subject on which we are in fact, for the moment, very, very angry and angry, I think, very, very late at the collective level. So in practice, what have we done since 18 months that this mission is in place? There are a dozen of files on which we have been interviewed and I will mention four very quickly. The state was asking us in the case of the initiatives of excellence to take collective commitment together. All the partners, it was a tense subject, I said it as often in many French sites, so it was necessary to put in place a process that I would call an intensive process of consultation the whole of the instances and the whole of the responsible. 18 instances mobilized, 210 responsible and the idea was to formulate all the amendments. There is a V0, there is a preparatory text of the commitment, tell us where it is bugging, where you have a series of objections and it goes back 50 amendments, the text has therefore been modified and so on the basis of these amendments we made a cartography that was submitted to the administration and somewhere in total, it led to a relatively peaceful vote while we were part of a situation of departure that was relatively tense. Harder, second process, it was the co-building of the status of Nantes University. So there, it was really about putting in place a platform of consultation, so collaboration of writing. There too, a preparatory version is built, it is online and we ask the whole community to be able to formulate the objections, formulate the arguments, what is going, what is not going, what they want to modify and there too, it will last a little more than a month and a half of electronic consultation, a little more than 1200 people participated, a little more than a thousand opinions were formulated, more than 250 arguments without going back, the final report makes a hundred pages with a mapping of the different arguments and points of crystallization and there too, finally, it allowed an adoption by the instances in a very calm way of its new status. Another example, the Law on the Programming of Research in France proposed at the University three choices, it is the technique, I do not want to go back, but you know that it was an extremely contested law in the French public space. Obviously, here we decided that we would open a consultation to the whole staff to know what arguments they had for us each of the choices that were proposed to us, to do research of a New York professor or not, etc. And finally, there too, the system was quite important, quite heavy, there was a lot of participation a little more than 250 arguments that went back, a little more than a thousand opinions and it allowed to do, it is a cartography of the arguments which was submitted to the administration which finally chose not to hold any of the three choices proposed by the law. Last example, it is in the course of construction, it is a conference on sustainable development and there the work of the mission was a work of institutional design. We are going to create a new institution which will have the goal of being very inclusive and which is an alert institution of criticism, of reading the policies of the university in the eyes of the objectives of sustainable development and that means it is a fairly large institution, a 50 members with a series of principles that have been set, a man-woman parity, a personal-academic student parity and they are all drawn to the outside for two years in a row, the idea that is substandard is also to make this tool a little new, a socialization tool of a new generation towards responsibilities because we see a little everywhere in universities, in France at least, I would not say for foreign universities, on the fact that the responsibilities are always a little the same and that we have a lot of trouble to emerge, as well as the students at the staff, of individuals who want to engage in responsibilities and who are ready to learn the fact of positioning themselves at the scale of a very large establishment and not simply at the scale of their immediate proximity, that is to say reading the university just from its feet and from what we see on a daily basis. To be able to exercise a responsibility is to enlarge its view, 42,000 students, we say about 5,000 people, 5,000 staff, it means to enlarge its view to extremely varied fields, to extremely varied nature of problems and this, it takes and it takes this type of responsibility exercise first and it is one of the roles of this sustainable development conference, it is also to raise a generation of people towards this type of responsibility. There are many other fields still, as you can imagine. Thank you. Thank you, Arnaud. Just one word to tell you on this subject of the open government, one of the issues obviously, it is also what we call open data, open data. We are working on it, we have already given access to all the data of piloting internally, to the whole community. We still have a lot of university in France, a lot of work on this subject. To conclude and open up the time of exchange, I just want to encourage on the implementation of all these actions that you have proposed in favor of an open university that we have shared with you. Well, you have understood, I hope, that we are quite committed to the political plan. At the same time, if it was enough to discredit that an university is an open university so that it would rise, so we saw it, we have a lot to do, we have means to find, we have the pedagogy to lead, always and still, to explain why, to explain what the levers are, to raise the fears, to respond to the questions and to this title, we are also very demanding to take advantage of your experiences to know how difficult you have encountered, how you want to overcome. In short, to continue, we also need you and therefore we hope to take advantage of this time of exchange. In any case, thank you for your attention. Questions. Thank you very much. You got a question. Hello. Okay, thank you very much, Madam and all the team for your presentations. And I congratulate you for everything you have done and everything you continue to do. And we all need one of the others, I mean, because your experience is also very inspiring. But I have a question of procedural order, of detail concerning the archives. Because I myself did some work with a few French-speaking instances, such as the UF, where I had to publish what I was doing on the archives, but I take another example where, for example, I have a scientific article published in Information Systems Quarterly or whatever. And what I still have, there are publication requirements with these editors and that the articles are not necessarily open. So in that case, would the French law have to publish that on the archives or is it only what has been published within the university research teams? Thank you very much. The French law, of course, does not apply to the whole world. Yes, indeed, it all depends on each situation. When the French law applies, what it allows is that the author can decide to put online free access, not necessarily on HAL, but directly in an open access review. Obviously, it can be put online otherwise. At the University, we made the choice of the national public open archive because there is also an issue in the open archives of the use of data which are made, which have the open archives and then the social-scientific networks. It is obviously not the same thing. So then, there, on the international dimension, the contract that you signed. Sorry, I can't be much more precise than that, but in principle, it is the contract that specifies the applicable law and that is what determines what you can do or what you cannot do. Please. Hello. First of all, thank you very much for presenting this aspect of open education. The aspect is really rather... rather than personal. I found it very interesting first. At the point that you mentioned, it was on the part you said that you wanted to open courses to everyone, as many as possible, and you said that for some courses, it was not possible. And already, I would like to know why and then to know, well, the problem is that if we close some courses again, we will not be in a total open education. So I would like to know if you have solutions to bring this. Your question. Well, we are in France in a relationship with our colleagues or between us, teachers and researchers who will not allow or will not allow us to impose in an authoritarian way and how to say this deposit and systematize it. For that, we will arrive with conviction and the students will help us. We have heard the words of the students because we have discussed with them and in the very formal framework of an instance that is called our academic advice, which led us to this will to have access to the maximum of resources. So that's our intention and we will share it and we are convinced that with time very few teachers, former researchers will finally pass or will voluntarily avoid sharing these resources as much as possible. After what I just mentioned is that indeed on a platform such as our Moodle platform called MADOC here at university we will not be able to put everything, not a pedagogical resource. In fact, there are evaluations, for example, that can go through the platform where there may be some confidential elements or in any case that we want to keep exclusive for a group of students. That's all. But in any case our intention politically and clearly is to open to the maximum and also open to all the staff. I like this example it is that an informatic who has been active for 25 years we wish that he could see what today how we teach informatics in our professional licenses or our bachelors of technology at university. That's it, that everyone can use the maximum of resources. Maxi, if you don't mind, my French is very poor. Can I speak Spanish or can I speak English? What do you prefer? English, okay. Thank you very much. I think you are an example to many universities and I congratulate you for all these wonderful efforts. I have a question that I am not sure if it has been answered already. I think you talked a little bit about it but I am very interested in your reflections here. I saw in one of the slides that you used Moodle as a learning environment and then you had a concentric circle wider for sharing with the public and when I think about Moodle or other learning environments, typically there are very well structured learning journeys, very well contextualized learning resources and experiences. Yet, when you come out to a different repository, you need to learn to make sense of what has been shared from the Moodle into the wider and also obviously this is not just a technical or pedagogical question it's also a philosophical question. What's the relationship for you between what you have indoors in your modules in Moodle just for your students and what comes out to the general public. What's the philosophy behind it and the technicalities as well if you could illustrate. Thank you. Thank you for your very technical question. We have in the room our vice president in charge of these questions that could probably be completed if I'm not precise. Our first technological challenge today is that we indeed have Moodle platforms within our university which are not interoperable which are not connected. We have components of our schools which today we have several platforms where we can raise this difficulty and solve this problem to make all our interoperable devices communicate. Then we work on this question within Uniwell, the European university because the goal and the objective is to find a solution to connect our platforms also. Then we have this problem that comes out of a problem of interoperable Moodle that to have open resources and all over the world. We are in the same phase of study on the most appropriate system but I've been listening since Monday about experiments and we will really get inspired by what is already done because a lot of things are already done and it seems that technologies are necessary to be able to open and communicate. Of course the whole world will not have access to everything we produce to a state a production level which is for us, as for you not yet the opening and the free educational resource we are talking about here between us since Monday. Yes, thank you for your presentation. I have a question that has been in the way of what has just been asked about how do you think of the articulation because one of the problems of the DRL is still the question of visibility to a more national or international scale to avoid multiplying the interoperable the places where it is You have talked about partnerships that you have with the university in particular, the digital university what do you think about this articulation will you integrate in existing things or will you develop your own platform knowing that if all universities do the same at the same time, it will not go in the right direction from my point of view. Completely agree with you and I will not bring you a solution or share our decision we have not made a decision yet we have not made a decision within the DRL but since Monday I have discussions with our friends who are also from Louvain who are in the European University Circle who also ask these questions and we discussed the other day with other colleagues here how to make try to make common work to find a way to mutualize and to arrive to something unique we have to understand position and decision it is not the case yet we are not there Hello, thank you very much for your very inspiring presentation I am from the University of South University of South in Tunisia Liliya Shinniti Coordinatrice of the University of Hillarning and the University of Pedagogy and my concern is the problem of my university and I think it is also the problem of several universities and the ranking and the accreditation of our graduates and I ask myself the question the president of the university and all the structures always want to articulate everything we hear with these two objectives the accreditation and the ranking and so can the open support these two objectives and if you have taken into consideration these two objectives how could you implement it really, thank you very much I would like to react to the accreditation and the ranking so you talk about international ranking that's good in fact it is a reflection that we engage just to say that it has never been our compass the international ranking are not our compass the criteria that are used do not really correspond to what we wear, to what we want to do so they exist we will not ignore them but it's not that that guides our policy and by the way there is a reflection and you know they are more and more discussed, contested and that is a reflection that we are just opening so we can't go much further but to finally say what is the good tool whether it is the ranking to say right away whether it is the objectives of sustainable development whether it is something else whether it is our impact on society but in fact to have indicators of a compass in some way that makes sense in relation to what we wear for the establishment, in relation to the university's mission and to be very clear it is not the role of the international ranking so we do not rely on it very clearly on the accreditation side well on the accreditation side I want to say you are on a model finally another country on another model for our establishment it's going well since several accreditation and it's going well because it's very long as a process roughly speaking it lasts 4 years so we will be accredited the minister must sign these accreditation stops in the coming days to start a new accreditation from September 2022 and it's been 4 years in the process, it's very long expensive but it's going pretty well and in two phases a phase of evaluation by a highly charged council which is independent and with whom too our colleagues, finally ourselves can participate in these evaluation committees and we are evaluated judged, appreciated but we can discuss, we can exchange we can come back, we can talk and then we have a second obviously in the level since the level of decision is within our ministry and with the general direction of higher education and innovation and professional insertion we can talk and I do not say it because it is present of the general directorate in the room but in fact we can talk, we can come to talk and in the end to find solutions and we manage by modifying our projects when necessary in the different short, so no, no I find that the process it's very long but also it lasts well to mature our project I see I am in function since two years and I am very actively this process because we entered from 2020 in really the process of reflection towards our future accreditation and all these exchanges have allowed on the training on which we could still question a final decision that is the most balanced possible And the fact of engaging in open education is not an obstacle to accreditation because I think there was that in your question obviously fortunately Ok, thank you I am Thomas Bois I am Thomas Bois teacher at the higher school science and technology information communication I really appreciate your presentation as much as you are out you have out all the dimensions of open of open education it was very interesting I also appreciate your strategy of opening free educational resources local for all students and all over the world sometimes I am curious about your strategy of opening in the reverse that is to say because the open is not only towards others but the open is also to accept what comes from especially if I produce free educational resources to what level are you ready to use that in your university given that you do not only French students, you have a lot of Africans and you work on French and African as well Thank you Thank you for your question Yes indeed I will develop but start with an example we are open and obviously also in this sense since we want participate and participate also means benefit, share but also receive and contribute I just take an example that I mentioned in the exhibition Collin de la Higuera collaborates with colleagues from the University of Mohamed 5 or 6 Rabah in Morocco to work and to create training modules we appropriate them and we will continue to appropriate them to also train our teachers but in the domain of the use of free educational resources obviously the idea is to appropriate, to mobilize and to invite, to prepare to form, to sensitize our colleagues to appropriate these resources to conceive their own teaching as soon as they are able to transmit on the basis of of what the world community teachers and researchers can bring share as resources Thank you very much I think we will stop because otherwise we take too much on the program. Thank you very much and then I suggest you a coffee Thank you very much