TRANSLATION NOTES: Please read some comments at the end of this post.
A few days ago I commented that this year my goal, a very hard one(*) is to systematize the experiences of a project that has taken me two years in the implementation of municipal cadastre.
Last year we took the first step by means of systematization diploma in order to build local capacity, to experience and to realize of what complex can be knowledge management for useful purposes. As a result, after four months, 6 technicians entered to a learning process, 4 were graduated, 1 product came out almost ready to print, one was at an acceptable level and the third was an exercise in how not to systematize.
This year what just remains is the dilemma of how you can create a knowledge system in the municipal cadastre area, which can be digestible even though it is a compendium, manageable though it is deep themed, practical though its conformation may sound complex… nothing to do with impressing just with a single map.
Today I had an educational interview with my systematization advisor; it’s a pleasure to work with someone like him, from whom each statement produces the feeling to be so essential as to write a whole book, but with the convenience level that solves immediately my great doubts.
So the proposal I mentioned earlier as a compendium, is now taking the form of a “system” with which we have defined that the publishable volume would be the four proactive papers documents, and a practical guide level would remain at CD level, which can be upgraded under the principle like the GPL licenses and especially involving screen captured videos or from the process itself.
It is known that throughout Latin America there is now a trend, or in other words a fashionable tendency, to systematize experiences, the two most used approaches are:
- One which stays at a descriptive level, where many experiences are collected in compendiums. Of course, not to reply but rather as a level of “induction”.
- The other is a concept, which we’re betting, in which the experiences are intended to be replicated, so that its content acquires the necessary volume for “deduction” purposes but without forgetting its practicality and handling.
I don’t want to bore you more inside of this words confusion, so I leave a picture that I found in arkitekturaz, which reminds me that all the spatial smoke in my proposal must end in a whole complete entity, useful, practical and digestible… under the “systemic” concept.
Systematizing experiences is not difficult, it can be learned. Systematize for a real replica… might be a difficult one.
(*) “Mi hueso duro” is an Spanish idiom that means something that’s not so easy to obtain.