 Well, it kind of started out as a strategy in the geology department. We kind of made it a mission. Part of the mission statement is to have the geology faculty fold in as much real fuel experience into our curriculum and the idea is that geology and hydrology, natural systems are complex and the more we can introduce students to these complexities in real situations, the better off they'll be in understanding and learning science. So originally the course revolved around the Lake Wacom watershed because I had access to data. That was my research area was I use it as, I essentially use it as a laboratory, an outside laboratory. The whole course revolves around the Lake Wacom watershed. There's multiple benefits from that and one of the benefits is that students take ownership in their learning in that regard because it involves one in their backyard and it's not learning how to analyze precipitation out of a textbook. We're looking at real data, precipitation data from real gauges that exist in the watershed. So they take more ownership in their learning not only because it's in their backyard but it happens to be an environmental issue. So I bring environmental literacy into the course as well. It's their drinking water source so they're interested in that. So it helps in that regard and I'm constantly learning new things. So I'm able to share through my research experiences and what I'm discovering with them and pull that into the course and through these projects. So how the writing came into play is naturally writing again. My one ultimate goal for the writing is have them re-experience the scientific method. So by re-experiencing the scientific method is most benefited from actual problems. Real data because real data are not, they're complex. So what I'll do with these projects is give them the question. That's the main thing. So they don't have to hunt through the spend a lot of time thinking about the question. I give them the research question, I give them the actual data and they go through inquiry process. They analyze the data. I teach them techniques on how to analyze the data then it's up to them to interpret the data. And it's the interpretation again that folds into my ultimate theme of am I learning the science? Am I learning the concept? And they're learning it by writing it and they learn I think from report to report that like for example their first report, they're having difficulty writing it's many times because they don't understand the concept. So then they put more effort into the following projects to better understand the science so they can get better grades on the next report because they've written it better and made it more understandable to me. Finally I tell them that what you're talking about in your discussion has to circle around to your introduction. What you're mentioning in your results has to point back to the methods that if you're telling me methods about how you're collecting data, your results should be pointing back to that. And I constantly tell them that it's a circular process. Everything should be circular in that document in the end. So the mechanical little things about grammar and if they're, you know, I'll give them details about a table and how it should be structured. I wait that less in my final analysis because it's really their difficulty and they need help getting their thoughts into words and I'm hoping they realize that that difficulty sometimes can be mitigated by better understanding the science.