 Good morning. Can anybody hear me? So it's a real pleasure to be here with you. Thank you, David, and the rest of the conference organizers for inviting me. It's also, I'm excited to be back to back with Dr. Groom. Glad that I don't have to follow him. And it'll be interesting. I think that, I don't know what he's going to say, but I bet that he'll really begin with learning and work out from there. And I think that I'm going to start from kind of the 30,000 foot view of the system and work backwards toward learning. And maybe we'll meet in the middle, and maybe we won't. So it should be interesting. I do have ties to Mary Washington, actually. My high school girlfriend went to college at. It was Mary Washington College at the time. So 19 years ago, I used to drive up and down I-95 to go visit her. So I titled this presentation Access Is Not Enough, which has a double meaning. And I think it's a common refrain in the OER community that we know this. We know that access isn't enough. But it's also a lot of the work that drives our work at the foundation in post-secondary education. And it's true in the US, but I think it's also true around the world, that we know and we increasingly know that access is not enough to give people the chance to follow their dreams and access opportunity in this country. Access is not enough. So just a bit of a background on me, for those of you in the room who I don't know. So I spent the first two-thirds of my career in the private sector working in Fortune 500 management consulting, technology, and then about the last third in the nonprofit sector. And so I've always been focused on increased access to opportunity. And so my family, how many portal agents do we have in the room? So that's a Puerto Rican Appalachian, right? There aren't very many of us. So my great-grandfather got thrown out of Puerto Rico because he was a socialist agitator. And they put him in jail. And they said, you can either stay in jail or you can leave. And so he went to New York City and worked hard and made enough money to send his daughters to college. And he said, what's the exact opposite place? They lived about 125th Street in what's now Harlem. And they said, what's the safest place I can send them? The Hills of West Virginia. So he sent his daughters to West Virginia. And that's where my grandmother met my grandfather. And their child, they said, what's the best place that we can send our child? He went to West Virginia University. That was the best option they had. And then my parents in return created opportunities for me. And that's really the American dream. That's really the education. We love this sort of Horatio Alger, one generation rags the riches. But the reality is opportunity in this country is one that builds over generations. And so that's something that I've always been passionate and worked on. And then I also have enlightened self-interest. These are my three boys. Jackson's the oldest. Keegan in the middle and Jonah, who's one. So I've got some obligation to carry forth the work here. So here's what I hope to put a few points on today. One is really step back and look at the next decade, focusing on higher education in the US. But I think the trends in some form or fashion are true for K-12 in the US and are true for education internationally. Share a little bit about the work that we're doing, but not spend too much time. But I think you have some context for how, given these challenges and opportunities, how are we at the foundation trying to react to those, be supportive and helpful of folks in the field, including many in this room, and then end with sort of three challenges for the community. Things that I'd love to see OER do, and this community do in the next 12 to 24 months. Many of them, I think people have already been talking about over the last year, but I'd like to raise the challenge banner even higher. So four challenges for the next decade. So as we look at the set of opportunities and challenges here in the US, there's four in particular. One is this completion challenge. Access is not enough. It turns out that we've done a remarkable job helping more and more students go to higher education in this country. We've almost doubled the rate of participation in the last, I think, 30 or 40 years. Turns out we still have about 40% attainment rates of associate's degrees or higher in this country. You know what it was in 1980? 40%. You know what it was in 1990? 40%. You know what it was in 2000? 40%. You know what it was in 2010? 40%. So we used to be number one in the world in education and now, depending on what you look at, we're 10 or 16th. And at the same time, we've got jobs that are going unfilled. There's some estimates, there's three million skilled jobs that are unfilled in the US, even with high unemployment rates. And labor economists tell us that 63% of all jobs in the US will require some type of post-secondary education by 2018. So, and the real driver of much of this is the dirty secret of low completion rates. You know, just about half of students who go to college will get a credential in six years. And if you look at community college students, if you look at low-income students, students of color, you're really about 25 to 25% to a third. You know, people know our friend with KIPP, you know, great charter school, incredibly successful working with low-income students in cities around the country in the US and getting them to college. 98% go to college. You know, they just got their first cohort back, you know how many completed? 25%. Right, so there's somebody saying, oh my gosh, we have to step back and say, we always said, go to college, go to college, go to college. Whoops, what happened to the 75% of students who were the high flyers and now they've come back to the community without a credential, oftentimes in debt, and sort of sending the signal, wow, these were the ones who were supposed to really make it out. So we also have a quality challenge. You know, the book, Academically Adrift, if folks have looked at that, it says something like half of students in college in the US don't make any measurable improvement in critical thinking skills in the first two years of their schooling. And it's always something like a third don't make any progress in four years. And so people are calling into question, wow, what are we really learning? Is this really valuable? And is it worth it, right? Peter Thiel is paying students $100,000 to drop out of college and saying, maybe that big investment of time and dollars isn't worth it. And so that leads to the funding challenge. You know, folks, educators in this room who work in the US know what's happening with state budgets. States are divesting in higher education. They've been doing it and they will continue to do it because there's a long-term competition in state budgets between healthcare and higher education. And healthcare is gonna win that battle because their costs are going up and they have an incentive to fund their Medicaid programs because they can pull down a matching dollar from the federal government. If you cut your tuition, I mean if you cut your funding of state systems and they raise tuition, well now your tuition is higher, you can pull down more federal dollars from the federal aid program. So there's an incentive between the states and the feds that encourages states to fund healthcare and to not fund higher education. And so you know how much higher education has gone up since the early 80s? 439%. Healthcare has only gone up 250%. Higher education tuition and fees have gone up almost twice the rate of healthcare. And I'd like to ask the question, how many students in the last decade funded their higher education on the backs of their home equity or that of their parents? It's gotta be a lot, right? I don't know, 10%, 20%? Well where do we know that home equity is? All right, that home equity's gone. And student loan debt is over a trillion dollars, is more than all credit card debt in this country and it's the only debt you can't get rid of in bankruptcy. All right, so states' ability to pay and families and students' ability to pay are reaching a breaking point. I know this is a rosy picture I'm painting. But these are, this is the reality of the next decade. And then lastly on the demographic challenge, you know the students that are coming to higher education, so we expand access, we have a challenge with developmental needs, we have students from all types of backgrounds and the reality is that the new normal is students who attend part time, work, haven't come right after high school. So the Department of Ed describes traditional students as those who attend right after high school are dependents on their parents, they attend full time. That's somewhere between 25 and 30% of higher education in this country. 70, 75% are non-traditional students. So those are some of the challenges that we look at is we say how do we extend opportunity, help more students get access to the opportunity structure in this country? What are we facing together at a sort of very systemic level? But let me bring it down to 30,000 feet and tell a quick story about Brianna. Brianna is a woman, one of our, the bottom of this page, all the pages got cut off, but Sarah Goldrick-Rabb is a researcher that we've worked with in Wisconsin. And she interviewed these students, they find out what's happening. What does the pathway to opportunity look like for young people today as they enter post-secondary education? So this is a woman who did pretty well in high school. She got an AP credit in chemistry. She was gonna get a two year associate's degree on the way to being a veterinarian. And the researchers asked her, today you're starting college, what's the probability you finish with a credential? She said 100%, 100%, I'm sure of it. I'm here on purpose, I know where I'm headed. She had some financial needs, she was a Pell student, she got some money, she got her parents to kick in and she had about $4,500 of unmet need. So here's what Brianna's schedule looked like. She had to live about an hour away from campus in order to have a cheap rent. And so she would drive about an hour to school, she had a 10 class in the morning, then she'd drive to her first job, drive back to school, 10 class, drive to her second job, get home about midnight, and she was to be so amped up from the day she'd take a muscle relaxant. And there's not much time for homework in here either, you might notice. So this is what happened to her. She'd fall asleep in her class, she would wake up in a puddle of drool and look at what happened at the end of her first term. DCD withdrawal, 0.075, she was asked to leave her program, she was dismissed from her program because she couldn't perform academically. And this is what she said. She said it was almost kind of like a relief because wow, this is over. This thing I was doing just wasn't sustainable. You went through all this stuff, all this work and I accomplished nothing. I failed, I was just crushed. I'm never gonna get anywhere and I pretty much have no hope for the future. One semester, she went from 100% sure to I have no hope for the future. So my question to this group is what can openness do for Brianna? And I don't know, but that's the big challenge, the other thing that I wanna put in the room is what can this community do for Brianna? And so I mentioned this, how's the world change? Is students are increasingly non-traditional and that's not the only change, but how ready are institutions to serve these students? And this is great research if you haven't seen it, the Illumina Foundation supported it called the Iron Triangle and they interviewed college presidents and they said, how are you addressing these challenges? How are you thinking about this work? And they said, you know what? And they didn't use these words, but they said that these three things are locked in an iron triangle, quality, access and costs. If you wanna prove one of those, I can, but the other two will suffer. You wanna prove quality? Great, I'll lower access. I know which students not to let in and I can drive quality up. Or you gotta pay me more money to do it. So what does this tell us? This tells us that the higher education system in this country is Pareto optimal. Do you remember what that term is? We're perfectly efficient. There's no more room for improvement. We're locked in an iron triangle. We've reached the apex of per, wait, that's not true? Right, so what it actually is telling us is this. This is, I stole this picture from Cable, is that we've actually tied the giant down. This is Gulliver and how the Liliputians tie Gulliver down is a thousand little strings. So we think of the policy, we think of the cultural challenges, we think of the ways that we've got people with different types of control and decentralization. And it's like, wow, we wanna do something radically different? How would we do that? We're Gulliver. And so the question is, how do we cut enough ropes that the giant can get up and actually serve more students better, more affordably? We need to make incremental improvements, but ultimately we need to be pushing the envelope in some really hard and provocative ways that make ourselves uncomfortable and make our constituents uncomfortable and make the status quo uncomfortable. But that's not gonna happen cutting one rope at a time. And so my first question was, what can openness do for Brianna? My second question is, how can openness free the giant? To help more students succeed, to do it more affordably, yeah, that's a challenge I put on the table today. So let me step back and say, how are we thinking about this? We sort of, this is our diagnosis of some of the challenge. So let me, this is the, I can't talk without at least one slide that's got eight point font in it. So this is probably the only one, but I won't commit to not giving you another one. So why do we focus on education in the US of the Gates Foundation? The reason is, education is the primary arbiter of opportunity still in this country. So if you could pick, if you're born poor in this country and you could pick one thing about the circumstances of your birth, what would it be? Would you pick, would you pick the color of your skin, the zip code of your birth, whether or not you're in a single parent or a two-parent household? We know what you'd pick, your mom's education. Your parent's education, that's what this eight point font slide shows. On the far left, 30% of the correlation between your economic standing and that of your parents is determined by education. It's twice the effect of race, three or four times the effect of the health of your parents, state of residence, whether or not you're in a female headed household, et cetera. So this is the primary reason that we focus on this work. But here's the challenge. Higher education is not equally distributed. All right, so here's another eight point font slide, sorry. If you look at this, this is from 1970 to about 2010. What's the probability that you will earn a bachelor's degree by age 24? And the top line is the top income quartile born in the top 25% of this country and the brownish line is the bottom income quartile. So it turns out that you have about almost an eight out of 10 chance of getting earned a bachelor's degree by age 24 if you're born in the top income quartile. You add associate's degrees, you add a few more years, that's pretty darn good. If you're born in the lowest income quartile, one eighth the chance. All right, so as we think about, gosh, we need to have a better educated populist and workforce in this country. They're not coming from the top income quartile. We're not squeezing a lot more credentials and learning and success out of that. It's just 10%. So we have to figure out as a country how we educate the populations we've traditionally had a hard time serving. Low income students and students of color. And that's the inequity that we focus on in the US. So Bill and Linda founded the foundation based on the principle that all lives have equal value and everyone should have the chance to live a healthy and productive life. So 80% of the foundation's work is international. Internationally, health, agricultural productivity, those are things that actually drive quality of life and access to opportunity. And in the US, it's education. And it's not to say that's the only thing that matters, but as far as a place that has high leverage where we wanna focus our limited resources, that's where we focus. And so we focus on graduating from high school, ready for college, and that's the work we've been doing for about the last 10 or 12 years. And about three years ago, we acknowledged that high school is not enough and that we need to do additional work helping students get credentials be one year, two year, four year degrees beyond high school. And so that's the work that we launched about three years ago. And so there's three things that we're doing in that strategy. One, how do we think about rewarding the success of colleges who can drive toward completion, credentials that matter, learning that is relevant for society and employers and not just access in our measurement systems, what data we're tracking, how do we fund our institutions, do we fund them on how many students are there on the second Tuesday of the semester or on the last Tuesday of the semester? And how do we fund our financial aid? If we fund financial aid, if you got paid financial aid every two weeks like a paycheck, would that create the way that students think about going to school? Turns out it's the early pilots, maybe it does. The second thing is how do we think about accelerating early momentum? How do we help students get off to a great start? We know if they start well with low developmental aid needs, got their FAFSA filled out, early credit accumulation, enrolled in a program of study, intensity of study, the number of credit hours they're taking, those are all associated with getting through to the finish line. And so in particular we focus on developmental aid and the transition between high school and college. And then this last area, and this is the part of the work that I lead is how do we use technology, innovation, learning science to personalize learning and accelerate student progression? And I'm happy to talk more about the work that we do there offline. But let me take us to three challenges, sorry, three challenges for the OER community and I'll wrap up in 10 to 15 minutes here and then maybe a few minutes for questions. Okay, so first a few accolades. I think that one of the reasons I wanted to come here and spend time with you all is I think in an incredibly short period of time this community has come together both from the social connections of community and of the practical infrastructure around the necessary regimes and all the licensing and all that kind of stuff, the frameworks to support OER, but also building that movement and momentum around the culture of sharing and increasing access to large stores of knowledge and information around the globe and increasingly building out that. So I think that's, my hat is off to the work of, in a decade is probably even on the outskirts of how long it's taken, so it's really been impressive. So here's our third question. What problem are you solving with your work at Openness? And I think everyone comes together around OER and Openness but I don't think we'd all have the same answer to that question. I think there's lots of, there's lots of important problems to be solving with Openness. And so I'm not gonna talk about them. I'm just gonna say, what about all those problems I laid out before? What about Brianna? Can we solve any of Brianna's problems with Openness? Or can we solve any of those challenges to the education system with Openness? And so I sort of call these the three OER bugaboos but the reality is these are the bugaboos of every new innovation in education. Particularly those that are driven by innovation, technology, new ways of doing things, new behavioral change that's hard in institutions. Can you drive quality and impact? Can you drive adoption, usage, and can you achieve sustainability? These are no OERs, bugaboos. I'm just being provocative. They're all of our bugaboos that are not any new innovation that we wanna drive but all three of these are frequently leveled against OER. Where's the quality? Everybody contributes but nobody uses. And who's gonna sustain all this stuff? We've heard these questions a lot. And so I've got three challenges that I think would help address those. One is this is, and I'm gonna, they're gonna go from sort of the small to the abstract. And maybe this evidence exists and if anyone in this room has it, come find me afterwards. But everybody says, look at the cost savings. 120 dollar textbooks. We give that to zero or 20 or $30. How can that not be good for students? It can't not be good for students, probably. But how do we translate that through to the things that the system is being incented on? Do students really complete the course more often? I don't know. Do they come back for the next semester? Do they enroll in an extra course? And do they ultimately continue on to complete the credentials that they came to get in the first place? It's intuitive to think that it should have that impact but I don't know that we know that much yet. And if we can't quantify the impact here, we can't get attention for this. These are the things that people are wrestling with at the sort of presidential and state system level or as they think about higher education. Can we drive those things? And so I think drawing those connections and quantifying it, because then they can start to do the return on investment. Great, that is worth it because of this. And I know that David's been doing some good work at this at the K-12 level, but I think we need more and I think we need to be able to quantify not the savings, but quantify the impact of those savings on student success. And so, and why does this matter? Because I think we have to connect that message to the hot button issues in higher education. So from the students at general public, affordability, that's good. I mean, there's an inherent connection. Wow, you can save a student a hundred bucks? Good, check. And this, you can't really read it, but this is from one of the Occupy Wall Street people who said, 20 years ago I paid for college, my job's outsourced, I'm a 48-year-old student, and when I graduate again, I will owe a whopping $100,000. I hope I get a job, right? That's not just affordability, but it's affordability tied to employability. So, are we doing anything in openness around employability? Is this question, is college worth it? Not really. And then on the higher institutions, we'd like to joke that these are the real three Rs of higher education, right? Resources, regulation, and reputation. Those are the things that drive change at the institutional level in many cases. And so, what is it about those things I've put up before around student retention, progression? Okay, that's tuition, right? Students come back next semester, they're paying tuition. Okay, now that's resources, you've got my attention. Or, okay, I'm getting a lot of pressure to demonstrate outcomes. You're gonna help more students succeed? Okay, that's regulation. Oh, this is innovative, this is student centric. Okay, that's reputation, that feels pretty good too. So, how do we connect the stories to these hot button issues? So, that's challenge number one. Challenge number two, I put around content development, which is not a new challenge. I know a lot of people are working hard on this, but really designing, not for sharing, but designing specifically for reuse. So, let me ask this provocative question, which is, are we solving the long tail before the short tail? So, look at all the resources. I mean, wow, I feel like we're hitting the long tail. But do we know what are the 10 or 20 or 100 or 1,000 resources that we need to serve the short tail? I don't think that we've been concentrated enough on solving the problems of the mass market with OER resources in a structured way. And there's a theme running through this talk, and I'll come back to you in a second, you know, we live in 2011, but we expect everything to be as mature as the 2011 web and the 2011 way of the world. And I'm not suggesting we go back in time, but we also have to remember how things evolved. How did the long tail evolve? It evolved because we first figured out this sort of mass market thing, and then we're allowing the long tail to evolve. Does this work need to go through that same kind of path, or can we do those things simultaneously, or can we start with, you know, we turn on the system and we're in the 2011 world that's actually taking a long time to web it on the web, et cetera. So, this is David's Reusability Paradox, and again, if my bottom line slides were cut off, you'd actually see I did credit them. But the pedagogical value is inversely related to the potential for reuse, right? So, so much of those thousands of resources are locally high pedagogical value. This is my resource in my classroom, and I'm willing to share it. But, you know, have we really designed for reuse? And so, we did this project with Rio Salado College, and we said, with all these resources, you have the great lecturers from MIT and Yale and Stanford, all these places, why haven't more people built courses around those, right? Why can't I get credit for Walter, Walter, Walter, Walter Lewin's Physics Lectures at MIT? MIT won't give me credit, but you know what? Why can't, why won't my local community college build a course around Walter Lewin's lectures, a facilitator? Doesn't this be obvious? And so, we said, let's try it. And it turns out it's really hard because of this paradox, right? And so, they picked Yale. They were already transcripted and the content mapped a little better, but, and they picked Physics and Psychology. And you know what they found? Was, you know, the, first of all, these 50-minute lectures are really hard to chunk up. You know, what are the learning outcomes? They're all blended together and it's hard to parse those out. But you know, it was really hard, is the faculty member said, you know, turn to page 24 in your textbook where chapter three begins. Okay, so one, you just locked me into a textbook. Two, you locked me into a textbook that came out in 2007 that's two versions out of date. Chapter three doesn't start on page 24 anymore. So now, I've got to figure out some way. I'm confusing my students. I've ignored page 24. I really want page 36 in this other textbook. It just doesn't work. And so, they ended up using Salcon videos much more than Yale videos because they were modularized, because they were tied to certain specific competencies. So, I don't know that Sal's necessarily designing for reuse, but, you know, are the Yale lectures and the Salcon videos on that same curve? Or, does Salcon have higher, further up to the right, higher potential for reuse and pedagogical value than Yale? I'd argue yes. So, how do we drive usage and reusability? You know, you guys are working on this stuff. I don't know exactly. But I would say a few things. One, how do we target specific use cases with high passion and high pain? Right, where people are really trying to solve a hard problem, there's commitment, and it's a big pain point. So, there are high enrollment, low completion rate courses, right? There are about 25 to 30 courses where dreams go to die in this country. Developmental math is at the top of the list. That's called the Bermuda Triangle. You go in, you never come out. If you're three levels deep in developmental ed, you've got a 4% chance of ever completing a credential. We say, oh, you can't fail placement. Yeah, but placement can fail you. You know, how do we think about supporting adjunct faculty? How do we think about national membership organizations, the American Psychological Association? What's their commitment to some of these challenges? Second, you know, there's a lot of work on improving discoverability, the National Learning Registry, the LRMI work that Cable talked about yesterday. If folks went to that, I won't get involved there, but I think there's a lot of opportunities to drive work there. And how do we finance distribution channels beyond viral networks? If you build it, will they come? Right, for the most part, they won't. And I think that we're getting some penetration through viral networks, and the question is, what else is needed? Okay, so that brings me to the third challenge, which is titled integration, instrumentation, and distribution. So how do we take all these resources, all these things, and focus it? So let's try and solve all the problems out of the world at the same time. That's a really hard problem to solve. How do we take a slice of the world and see if we can't solve it? And so here's what we hear from, when we go around and talk to institutions, faculty, and also to students. You know, these aren't OER things. These are things about how they're doing their work. Right? We want easy access to high quality vetted content. Open and publisher. Like, I'm not caught up in one or the other. There's some people who, my campus, who talk about this, but I want quality content. I don't really care where it comes from. I want the ability to compare efficacy and usability across this content. Wait a second, that means we need interoperability. That means we need comparable metrics. Okay, that's gonna be tricky. I want both personalization and localization. Okay, that's good. You know, I'm trying to get the best content, but now I also want to personalize it. I want to see learning analytics and I want to see these dashboards and it's got to fit seamlessly into my existing technology. Piece of cake, right? So here's what I call my stupiphony, right? It's an epiphany that you feel like you should have had 10 years ago. And I don't know, people will disagree with me on this one, but. So on the left, we have Google's homepage. But this is like Google's homepage when they launched in 1998. So you'll see it says 25 million pages that they've indexed. They now indexed like a trillion, one trillion. So again, we think we live in a Google world. We think we can just type in a search term. Have you ever said help with polynomials in Google? You know what the least helpful thing to, if you need help with polynomials is to do, is to type that into Google. You get all kinds of stuff, right? It's not helpful to a learner. It's not, and it's only marginally helpful for an educator who needs to find some more resources to help with that learner. So there's one sort of crazy idea I have, which is that, you know, that assessment is really search. All right, diagnostic assessment is really search. So what if you said polynomials? Great, but let me ask you five questions. If I asked you those five questions, now I'll get you the right resources, support, tools. But polynomials, learning is a lot harder than webpage relevance, right? It's contextual, it's social, it's all these other things. So I would argue that we don't live in a Google world when it comes to our understanding of learning, learning experiences, and learning resources. We live in the other version of 1998, Yahoo. So everybody remember, well actually I was talking to somebody, I won't sell her out, but who didn't remember Yahoo 1998. But that was a taxonomy, right? You'd say cars, and you could choose from car repair, use car sales, new car sales. Okay, I want car repair. All right, I want body shops. All right, I want Japanese specialists, and then I want Joe's Japanese specialist auto body repair shop, right? We created a taxonomy to organize the work, and that helped us understand the relationships, and once we understood the relationships, then we could Googleify the world. And so I would argue or submit that right now we're trying to optimize for too many pieces in a multivariable equation, right? All these things vary. You need the student, the context, the content, the assessment, the learning outcomes, and then at some point you're able to certify that look, this person's really learned something. And so how do we move from that to this, which is the way that we think about personalized learning. I won't belabor it because it's kind of a little bit confusing, but it really begins with the learning objectives in the center. Doesn't start with content. Content's three steps down the road. Starts with the learning outcomes and those learning maps and the progressions of knowledge, competency skills, the very specific ones, and the meta competencies and the deeper learning outcomes. And once you have that, then you can think about what do I currently know or not know and the role of diagnostic assessments, a persistent student data record, and then content assessment, did I learn it, and do that work around the learning map. So here's an idea, and I love people's reactions to this. So one, could we focus? Could we select a narrow set of short tail content areas? Not solving all the problems. And maybe we'd say, not just in general, we wanna solve it for low income students or students that we know are dropping out that are trying to go to college that aren't succeeding. So now we actually have a narrow ban. That's actually maybe a solvable problem. We need to develop detailed learning maps. We need to curate high quality and interoperable learning modules. So not just content PDF things, but things that help enact learning that are aligned to those learning outcomes that are multiple attempts at the same type of learning outcomes so that students have choice, so that faculty have choice, so that there's alternatives. I'm struggling with this. I'm struggling with this. What are my alternatives? Oh, there's a con lecture I could also watch. Hey, there's an open study, study group that's forming on this. There's a tutor I can ask a question to. How do we think about the learning map as the spine and then build these other resources around it? How do we think about what the tool set is for curation, localization, and delivery? Wouldn't it be great if I was a faculty member and I could go to the intermediate algebra homepage and I could say, hey, here's a generic playlist that seems to work pretty well for most students most of the time. And if you wanna customize it, tell us a few more pieces of information about who you are, who your students are, or dig into the material you want as well. So how do we curate all that content, get the best of that content? So we address that quality question and align it to these learning maps. And then how do we have the type of assessment and analytics so that there's that immediate feedback to students and to faculty? So we do a lot of work with what we call learner relationship management, kind of the use of data through the student experience. And there's a project at Purdue called Signals. I don't know if folks are familiar with it. But all they did is they did a predictive model in their learning management system that said based on the behaviors we're seeing, your login patterns, your quiz scores, we can tell you radio or green if you're likely to pass this course. You know what they exposed that to the student and they exposed it to the faculty member. You know what they did? 50% improvement in pass rate in their introductory engineering courses. Their engineering and science courses that were washing at all these students, 50% improvement because they empower the students. They gave them visibility into the system. They gave them that feedback. You know, I did go to slip to yellow. I kind of took, I had a paper I was working on, I kind of took last week off. All right, I gotta buckle down. Or it's red. I gotta go see my faculty right now. Empowering that student with that data has made a big difference. And then, how do we think about distribution, right? As Cable likes to say, we are the market, right? So how do we get a handful of institutions that say look, we can try this. We have 50 to 100,000 students across X number of institutions. Let's aggregate the demand. Let's not all try to solve this individually. And importantly, how do we develop common, shared, sustainable distribution channels? Every OER project in this room is facing sort of two options of distribution, right? The viral network of OER and try to build and partner and connect off those. Or the traditional way to do distribution, which is you hire a sales force, right? We've got four 250 person sales forces from the major publishers, wandering around this country, making house calls. That's the value in publishing. When a publisher buys another publisher, what do they do with the books? They throw them out. What do they do with the customer list? They treat it like gold, right? The book, the content is just table stakes. But most of the value in publishing is in the distribution, right? And so until we think about how do we get a comparable distribution channel for OER content, we're left with the viral OER community. And everybody can't build one of these on their own. So can the OER community build one that kicks ass? I don't know. But I think that's a challenge, or are there interesting ways to solve that problem? So I am shutting up in less than one minute. So if we did all this, what would it mean, right? Would we address the quality question? Yeah, here's the best content. And it's tied to these learning outcomes and we can document it. And you as a faculty member can see, does this perform better than this? For my types of students, wouldn't that be great? Isn't that what they really want? It would solve this distribution and usage challenge. If you can aggregate the demand, start producing those learning analytics. And I think the system like this could actually generate revenue and provide sustainability. So those are the three challenges that I would leave. Evidence, content development, and the actual integration and distribution of OER content. So let me just thank you and leave you with this one quote, which I have hanging over my desk. And so folks who are familiar with this, the man in the arena, it's a quote from Teddy Roosevelt, who basically said, the people who are doing the work are the real heroes. And the people like myself who get to stand on the outside and trying to say provocative things on stage and are really just the critics. And it's you all who are doing the great work and it's we who are in service of you. And so thank you for that work and thank you for letting me share a little time this morning.