 At the end of 2011, I was tracking 351 virtual worlds and that's for kids as well as adults. So at the end of first quarter this year, we were up at least according to my numbers as many as 440 virtual worlds and MMOs, massively multiplayer online gaming experiences. And that number continues to climb. Some industry experts in the virtual world space think that the number could reach as high as 800 within about a year and a half. And not all of them are for children. The last time I took account of all that I had, it was somewhere around 120, 130 of these worlds were targeting kids as young as 4 or 5. Some names that many of us would be familiar with like Club Penguin or Webkins. But there are a number of newer players as well. Minecraft is growing like crazy with kids globally. PopTropica by Pearson is a really popular one or Family Education Network. It's a division of Pearson. Wizard101 is a very popular destination and the interesting thing about that world is the amount of co-play opportunities between child and parent. And I think that might be part of the reason why their numbers are so high. It also includes adults in their world. Fantage, Moshi Monsters is very popular in Europe and has been taking off over the last year and a half here in the U.S. as well. What the folks at King's Isle Entertainment claim about their virtual world, Wizard101, is that some parents or grandparents are interested in connecting with their children and they actually keep in touch through the game. The virtual world experience might be at home and the classroom time, you could spend time talking about what happened in world. How did you interact with each other in world? Some worlds are better than others I think for facilitating learning opportunities. Panwapa I think initially has some neat opportunities but ongoing in a longer term basis. It doesn't carry quite as well. Part of the success of a good virtual world is having a reason to come back. And I think the initial experience in Panwapa is great but the reason to come back isn't as strong as it could be. When kids get very involved in virtual worlds there's an awful lot of reading and a lot of writing that goes on through chat. But at the same time I know as we keep talking about what does it mean to update COPA and how does that relate to kids interacting online today and their privacy rights. And there's an awful lot of time spent about how kids communicate in world through virtual worlds. And one of the things I've noticed is that as Skype becomes more and more popular with families, kids can use it as well behind a virtual world to communicate with their friends instead of through the in world system that many virtual worlds build in as part of their product. Technology and communicating through technology is changing so quickly that I think it's rewriting a lot of the rules where legislation can't keep up. There was a great game theorist named Eric Zimmerman who said well should we also bookify learning? One might argue all games can teach something. But though there are many games that are just very bad examples of how to learn and not all games are created equal when it comes to learning content and learning opportunities for children. And that's where I think the really challenging part is about games and learning that there may be many great game developers but very few of them understand child development or how children learn. And I think that's why this is not as successful a space as it could be. Learning should be intrinsically motivating to begin with and often is for many young children. And now if we're adding a point structure and badges and so forth we're changing the motivation and making learning an extrinsic interest in an effort to gain points and status within a game. And that's where I have some challenges with it. Are games wrong in the classroom? No. I mean I think there are some really great games out there to use in a classroom. But it takes a smart developer and a really sharp teacher to figure out how best to use it in a classroom experience.