 OK, thank you very much. I'll be talking about, not about OER this morning, normally I do, but today I will be talking about initiative taken by the Berlin Senate a couple of years ago at the commemoration of the falling walls, of the falling of the wall, of the Berlin wall in 2000 and of 1989. In 2019 a foundation has been founded calling falling walls and its aim was, and still is, to break walls, tear walls down in science and knowledge. There are several domains and one of the newest domains is learning and education. It started two years ago with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. And this falling walls is a yearly conference around the 9th of November. I was asked to make an assessment of the first and second round of nominations and I will tell you about these two kinds of nominations and it's central theme is accessibility, more access and more accessibility of education and learning. I'm struggling. And the central theme, what I said, is which are the next walls to fall, it also holds for education. And the falling walls initiative of learning is called future learning and the way it is organized it consists of three parts. It's a future lab that identifies supports and gives visibility to key initiatives. The second one is a hub for peer learning, networking and the third one is a competition that scans the horizon and I will be talking especially about a certain element of this competition. Each year falling walls for its ten areas, a competition is open. It's open at this very moment and the nominations for learning are being validated on four elements. First of all, the accessibility, how does it improve or enlarge the accessibility of learning and education? The second one is, is it sustainable? Is the initiative sustainable? What are the proofs of the sustainability? The third one is the impact, how much impact does the initiative have? And the fourth one is, is it scalable? Can it be replicated in different contexts in different situations? The network consists of more than 200 stakeholders and innovators and here are the figures for the 21 submission. There were 71 applicants, 24 were shortlisted by an international jury, a peer reviewed jury and from these ten winners resulted and then finally one will be selected by an international jury, another jury, as the breakthrough of the year. The applicants came from different countries. This is an overview of the countries. In total there were 71 submissions from 34 countries. In 2020 it was 35 countries. Europe is 37% of the submissions. In 2020 it was 41. Africa is 18%. In 2020 it was 7%. And North America is 15% and it was in 2020 32%. So there is more, there's a change in that the participation from the global south is increasing and this is the result of enlarging the network of peers from the various regions in the global south. The 71 submissions we categorized them using the whole long IQ taxonomy. It is a taxonomy originally used for allocating VC, this ad tech initiatives and this taxonomy gives an overview of the different elements which can be discerned with regard to learning and education. If you want to know more there will be a publication from the Fallen Walls Future Learning Initiative, one of these coming days. And then you can have a more close look at this taxonomy and how we derived it and enlarged it. In order to make an assessment of the impact of the submissions we used the SAMR topology. Yesterday it was also already mentioned also. And it says from four categories are being discerned. The first one is substitution. Is the innovation a direct substitute with no functional change? The second one is augmentation. Does it add something so that the function is slightly altered? The third one is the modification. Does the innovation allow significant changes? And the fourth one is a redefinition. Is it completely new? Does it redefine a specific task or activity of learning? And what we did is that we allocated the several initiatives and it turns out that 60% of them is of the 71. So more than half is in the category of modification. In fact 42 of the 71 entries. And 22 of these entries relate to important changes in learning. Apps, bootcamps, AR, VR, gaming and simulation. And new ways of learning STEM and coding. In the next slide which is difficult, oh no it's big enough, these are the 10 winners categories. And what you can see is they come from 10 different countries. So these initiatives were not selected on the basis of countries. They were selected on the information available on scaling impact and all these elements. And then peer review jury has selected these for 10 winners. And the last one is Rory. I will tell more about it. It is the breakthrough of the year. It comes from Ghana. It is developed by a for-profit organization from Canada. And it is a concerned tutoring. And on the last column you see the type of SAMR category. Most of them are modifications. And two of them are redefinitions. We will ask, we is Dominique Orr and I will ask to make some reflections about the type of entries and what can be said of possible developments. And what we said and we discerned the four trends. It is there is an emphasis on low-tech and low-tech used for scaling up and reaching impact. Secondly, there is an emphasis on networks which build new social relationships. The third one is within the submissions. There was an emphasis on learning labs, hybrid learning experiences to foster innovation. And the fourth one was recognizing supporting the power of learning in the wild. I will go into each of these trends and giving an example. This is the winner of last year. It is low-tech. It is George Cowell, the director of Rising Academy Network. And he developed with his people a low-cost tool used in the telephone to an audio tool for engaging a personalized learning to any student on any phone. He did it in Liberia, Ghana and Sierra Leone. And more than 50,000 people are being reached momentarily. And it entails a very simple tool. On each phone, a student can follow, can make a test, and then he has to answer a question. And then he or she gets a feedback whether it's a correct answer or a wrong answer. And also it gives directions where the pupil has to give attention to. It's a low-tech, the phone on the backbone, a very intelligent AI system. And it is a combination using low-tech with a high, sorry, with a high impact. The third one of the second one is how networks will help build new social relationships. It is an ad-tech platform with the mission of disrupting traditional secondary education. And it is a real-world learning as a core part of school. It is in place. It makes it easier for schools to reduce the opportunity gaps of their students by providing access to mentors for internships. The third element is learning labs. It is an ICT academy and Tech Hub providing its communities with the right range of technology platform on which people can learn and practice software development. It is an introduction of online jobs, allowing people to solve their problems. And it is being developed in Malawi and it is being used by both refugees and rural communities. And it is spread out momentarily through Africa as a whole. The fourth one is recognizing and supporting the power of learning in the wild. And this is by a sunny young M-school. It is a wandering cellist. It encourages students to step out of school, make the city their classroom and create meaningful learning and growth through interactions with the real world. And it is breaking the walls of the traditional schools by using also high-tech of a combination of low-tech and in its backbone high-tech. Lastly, we were also asked to reflect, to make a reflection on what is missing in the 71 submissions. And we found out to our opinion, three elements are just lacking and the emphasis will be laid upon the submissions for this year. It is the question of data, data mining and using data. And data privacy and security. There was no project in which this item appeared as a focus of attention. Secondly, even if sharing is caring, it is also a way to provide more inclusive digital learning for all. This element of more inclusive digital learning was also lacking as an element of attention and focus. And the last one is greening tech. It is also about securing a better learning future for all. This element was not in 2020 an element and not in 2021 a focus. There is still time to nominate your own project. This is the URL. And so if you are aware of a project, of yourself, of somebody you know, please submit it. Okay. And I think that we have some time. If anyone has any questions, perhaps I'll start off and just refer to one of these amazing projects. This is astonishing work. I actually typed something out so it would be a bit structured. So you spoke about an emphasis on networks and building relationships. I speak in particular about Rory AI in Sierra Leone. And you also referred to the low tech devices. So as someone from the global south, what are the bare minimum characteristics of such a low tech device if you are aware that would enable Rory to be functional? Just a very simple phone. A very simple telephone. So you don't need an iPad. You don't need an iPhone. Just old school telephones are being used. It has to have a screen. That's all. But because it is audio, the phone is just the phone. A very ordinary, old fashioned phone can be the instrument at the user side. On the backbone is very sophisticated. It's AI and all kinds of services. So Ben, thank you. With all these projects you mentioned, like you were saying, revolve around network building. How much of that is reliant on proprietary software for one? And for second, do you feel like if you would look more at European and North American context, people would be less inclined to use free or open software because there's better accessibility to proprietary software or better affordability of proprietary software for network building? Okay. I don't have an exact figure of the proportion of the projects submitted relying on proprietary software or open source. But I know that, let's say 64, 65% of the projects are projects from non-governmental organizations, not for profit organizations. And most of them use open source software or at least make the tools they develop available as open source tools. There are second part of the question whether it's more easy to rely on proprietary software. I don't know. I cannot give you the answer on this question. But it's a good question. I think we should include it in next year's evaluation. Hi. Thank you for the talk. My name is Will. I lead Frontiers for Young Minds in one of the sponsors of this event. We're an open access journal for kids. So there's quite a lot of synergy here. And we actually did put in an application ourselves back in April. My question is related to shaping content tracks in the direction of them. We publish individual articles, but we're looking to make sure that those articles that are written by real researchers can be integrated into local, national, or supranational curricula. My question would be in your view, would shaping mini curricula enhance our scalability for a classroom? Because at the moment, whilst we can publish individual articles written by researchers and reviewed by kids, and we can certainly collect them and publish them and collate them in collections, there's a tag missing on them, which is the kind of the pedagogical element to it. I'm curious to know if that's something that you think would help with scalability in those kinds of issues. It's a multifaceted question. You're asking about the size of the learning objects. What I know about the projects, it differs very much. Most of them are very small. There's not one initiative. There are some initiatives of the 71 which relate to a curriculum or part of a curriculum in its entire form. But most of them use very small learning objects. And your second part was, yeah? So the second part was around scalability for classrooms specifically. Because of course, whilst, for example, in your organization where open education resources can help with supplementing, whilst national curricular changes, etc. I'm curious to know if there's specific elements of OER resources that make them more suitable for scalability in those scenarios? We haven't looked at this particular aspect of scalability. We looked at the scalability of the initiatives in total in its entirety. And you are asking about one of the building blocks of the several initiatives. We haven't looked at it. I cannot give you an answer on your question. I'm sorry. Well, thank you. I think we'll move on to our second presentation. Thank you, Ben. Can we have a round of applause?