 I think everybody understands that students can save a lot of money when you give them either a completely free resource or even if you have an institution that's running a formal OER program and maybe assessing a $5 fee or a $10 fee on a course. When you're replacing a $200 textbook with a $5 or $10 fee, obviously there are all kinds of benefits to students on the financial side there. And then how those benefits trickle down is something that we're really starting to wrap our heads around now but need to understand better. What are the changes in the drop rate? What are the changes in the percentage of students that complete with a C or better? Do students take that money that they saved on textbooks and reinvest by enrolling in an additional course? There's some preliminary evidence that they do that, that they take more courses in terms when they're assigned OER in place of commercial textbooks. Do they return next semester at a higher rate? Do they make those benchmarks of 15 credits completed, 30 credits completed faster? So there's a whole range of kind of learning outcomes that we have one, two, three studies around that are promising but we just need a lot more work in those areas. And then on the financial model on the institution side as well, there's a lot of questions about well what happens to our bookstore revenue if we start adopting freely available materials and students aren't spending lots of money at the campus bookstore. But at the same time when you decrease the percentage of students that drop a course before the ad drop deadline, then there's money that an institution would have refunded to students that now they retain instead of refunding. And also as I said a second ago, there's some preliminary evidence that students enroll in more courses in a term. So what the financial impact on the institution is where you've got kind of a negative delta on the bookstore side but a positive delta potentially in terms of revenue that you hold on to, that you don't refund, additional revenue as students enroll in more courses, just understanding that breadth of impact on the student and the institution and more recently we've started to have conversations about the impact on the faculty member as well. When you adopt a textbook you kind of receive a package and it's literally a package, right? It has a hard cover, it's on glossy paper but it's a thing or even if it's a digital object it's something that you have streaming access to, you probably can't download and own your own copy and you certainly can't make changes to it, you don't have that kind of permission. So this idea that when a faculty member adopts open educational resources it actually expands their academic freedom. It gives them more potential for what to take apart, what to redo, what to throw away, what to pull in from a third source. As faculty are starting to exercise those permissions or that expanded academic freedom then you see faculty attitudes are pretty positive in the sense that I'm empowered to do more now than I was before and as you start to see student outcomes track that investment that faculty members make in localizing and making more appropriate culturally sensitive things like that, the materials that they're adopting. That whole faculty usage piece is another piece that's top of mind in addition to the institutional impacts and the student impact.