 We would not have thought of creating what we created, nor the purposes for which we think now it's going to be able to be used. Originally the design was we knew we needed to measure historical thinking in teachers and in kids, because it was part of the grant that we wrote. And so we knew we either had to find a tool or develop a tool to do that to evaluate the entire project. And as it turns out it's written in such a way that we believe that it'll have much more valuable, probably in my opinion, formative uses with teachers. Because even as we showed it to them and got feedback and explained that this is really to evaluate the effectiveness of our grant project, what we found is organically teachers starting to work together to talk about, well if I really am going to create a lesson plan or a unit, and this is the rubric for it. This is a three. This is a two. This is a one. What does that really look like? And so they're starting to dig in deeper together, which was part of what we hoped to do, is that they would be a community of professionals that would work together. And the rubric's been a bit of a prompt to help them do that, even though it was designed for a different purpose. So now we see it as having these two purposes, a summative purpose and a formative purpose, that we hope, we think has the potential to guide instruction. There's an assumption that if I just pour enough information in at the top, it will funnel its way down into the classroom and this will work. Then we're just not convinced that that is going to work, and nor were we absolutely convinced that after year one it was working. And so what we really realize is that this rubric forces us to really recalibrate, redesign the whole thing. You just simply can't, if you have to address these things, you can't think that way anymore. And so it re-orients and it reframes the way we do our seminars ourselves, the way we do the kind of year end. It forces us to redo it because we have to answer it. And as professors we can get fall into that trap as much as anybody else. And it gives us a common way to move away from just that tendency, and I think in many ways, in some ways the ease of just dealing on the content side. It's not to minimize content at all. But it's instead to say that content has far greater meaning when it's matched up with a set of skills that you're developing. That content sticks so much better if it's actually attached to a real problem that you're trying to solve.