 Let me welcome you. Welcome everybody to the Future Trans Forum. I'm delighted to see you all here today We have a great guest with an incredibly important topic We've been talking for years about the difficult What some call the iron triangle of higher education that is how can we make higher education more affordable? Also, how can we improve its quality at the same time? How can we give more and more people more and more access to it? This is not an easy thing to figure out. There's quite a bit of difficulties in doing this. In fact some call this, you know, they echo this in terms of the old quality assurance thing for engineering. You can have something that's fast, that's high quality or cheap, but you can only pick two. Now what's interesting here is that Steve Ehrman, a lifelong scholar, a lifelong activist, consultant and worker in higher education, has put together research showing schools that have managed to do all three of these at the same time, that he's been able to find campuses that have improved everything. They've improved quality and access and affordability all the same time. It's remarkable and this is an incredibly, incredibly important set of discoveries and hopefully, hopefully, we can all learn from this. I'm just going to be Jeanette Cohn right now on stage. Hello, Jeanette. You were a great guest. And nice to be here. I'm looking forward to this conversation. Can you say more about your question about what you mean or how you're hoping to help us think through the iron triangle of quality access and affordability? So that's always the question is, you know, how do we improve these three things? And one of the ways is to improve quality by making a campus less accessible and more expensive. And that's a pretty classic way forward. And we also have the ability to make something more affordable, more accessible by reducing the academic quality. So I'm just wondering where people have run into this dynamic in their own lives, in their own work. I was picking on you in part because you're so smart and because you've been thinking about all of this. And since Stephens came back up, Jeanette, you do get to answer the question before I boot you up. Oh, no. Well, I look forward to hearing Steve, the expert thought on this. I guess I'll just say that attention I've noticed in quality access and affordability isn't thinking about how you measure the components of these three kind of qualities, too, right? How are you measuring quality itself? And then to what extent does the measurement of quality impact the ways that we also measure access? I think affordability is easy enough to measure, right? That's a pretty clear scale. But I think it gets hazier when thinking about, well, what does access really mean? Access to whom? Access for what? And then, again, how does quality sort of change or how does our perception of quality change when our definitions of access get either narrowed or broadened? So I don't have answers, just questions. I'll be interested in hearing Dr. Irman's thoughts on this as well. Thank you. Well, those are great questions. Thank you. And I'll let you go back to your whiteboard and bring you back up in a bit. Steve, welcome back. Thank you. It was a really terrible computer crash. So after a while, I gave up and I'm using my cell phone. I can see it's a different angle than before. But you sound good and your visual quality is great. So welcome and thank you for your flexibility. Sorry for the accident. So repeat the question again. Is it about the... I was asking everybody a question. But before I get to that question, I want to ask you just the personal question. I know you are somewhat, somewhat retired and yet you are producing a book and you're appearing to talk about this. So my question is, what are you up to for the next year? Are you going to be following this up with another book? Are you going to be, well, so you're going to be up to besides crashing computers? Well, for people who aren't familiar with what I've been doing, I need to explain that a little bit in order to make any sense at all of what it is I'm going to be doing the next year. I really got curious some years ago, often on maybe over 20 years, about the question of how quality access and affordability might relate to each other. And was it true that there was an iron triangle that made it impossible to change all three at once? Yeah. So I started looking for institutions that had some evidence that they'd gathered that they had been making improvements, at the very least in quality accessibility. And when I found my first one, I realized that by achieving gains in quality accessibility the way they had, they were also making gains in affordability. Whether the institution realized it or not, it was sort of coming along in a couple of different ways with those first two achievements. I started looking for more institutions. I felt that to have a book that was readable, I could do case histories that is the last 10 or 20 years of how each institution got to where it is today on five institutions, eventually I had to settle for six, because each one shed such a different light on the issues that we were tackling and what the possibilities were that they created. So over the next year, I'd really like to do case histories on another one to three institutions that are very different from the six that I've profiled already. So for example, I profiled only one two-year institution, but it's very unusual in both being very small and also very new. So a two-year college that's beginning to sense that they are in fact making progress in these directions. Or at least wants to talk to me about how I would suggest they discover this. That would be useful. I haven't looked at any traditional private institutions and I'm thinking particularly of institutions that are not the, you know, the Ivy League most famous of the famous because in general the highest prestige institutions are not as motivated to make these kinds of changes as institutions a notch or two below that. That is institutions with very capable people, promising activities, but without the reputation that sort of would hold them rigid because everybody would revolt at any change that was being made and how it's always been done. So whether that's working with an institution that's willing to answer a lot of questions or an institution that actually wants me to help out more substantively and trying to figure out where they are now and what next steps might be. What I'm going to do with that, I don't know yet. It would depend on what it is I'm learning. Do I try to create a handbook? Do I try to create a second book with some additional case studies that and text about, you know, what the whole framework now looks like with say nine case histories behind it rather than six. We'll just have to see what would develop. Well, I can't, I can't wait to see and to hear and if we can help, let us know. It would be really, really interesting to see. So friends, if you're new to the Future Transform, I'm just the moderator of the MC. I usually kick things off with another question, but then I get the heck out of the way and invite all of you to put forth your questions. So now that we have the author here, and we have your initial salvo of ideas, start thinking about what you'd like to ask him, for example, what use of technology, how can people use technology to try and solve that iron triangle, or what types of leadership are best qualified or best positioned to lead that kind of transformation? Or just questions about how does this even work? This seems to violate some kind of physical law. A question I'd like to ask you to begin with, Steven, is thinking about the past year and a half of the pandemic. How did the pandemic hit these strategies? Did this force any of your model institutions to change their habits in a way that returned them to the earlier problems, or were they able to persist even through COVID-19? I can say a little bit about that, but not much, because the active research phase for this book was ending about the same time the pandemic was starting. But I will say that the University of Central Florida, which has been making, is one of the two institutions that relies most on online and blended courses, has been trying to do that at scale for a very long time. So that the way that they offer courses, the skills that faculty have really pervade the institution. A rough guess would be somewhere between half and two thirds of all of the full-time faculty have already had some kind of training, not just in online, but in how you use pedagogy. I use basically the kind of same research-based insights into teaching and learning that apply both to online courses and, as it happens in a different way, to campus courses. And there had been a history already of faculty who had developed and taught online courses, then moving some of those pedagogical insights and some of those materials into campus courses, too. So they had a much less of a hill to climb. For example, there were something like 60 or 70 people in their, what I would call their teaching, learning and technology center already vastly bigger than most institutions have. I think you mentioned that UCF also has a very interesting funding model for how they fund their distance learning. Yeah, the state of Florida allows a distance learning fee to be assessed. And I'm going to get these numbers wrong probably, but as I recall, the state maximum is $14 a credit and UCF has changed at charging, I think about $9 a credit. But again, I'm going to get this number a little wrong, but something like half of all their credits are coming from online courses. So this is a big revenue stream if you think about students taking some courses, some degrees with mostly or entirely online courses. And they're a channeling, I don't know whether it's most or all of that revenue, back into making sure that this is a high quality, large scale operation. That's really, really important. That closed loop there to keep improving that. And they've been doing this since like 2000 or so. Back in the late 90s. And I think they were really, it says something about their principles as an institution that at the very time they were considering do we offer online courses at all, and what should they look like. The academic deans were agreeing that whatever they offered had to be really high quality and sort of a good fit with the campus with campus offerings in terms of their effectiveness. So they were committed to subsidizing faculty to really learn a lot about how to create courses and teach them effectively online. That's very much money put into it. I mean, right now the estimate would be that they put about $20,000 per course into the first course that a faculty member teaches online. That's a lot of support. Yeah. Well, thank you. Thank you. And we have already your first question and I'm going to beam the questioner up on stage. So you can see how this works. We have Tom Haymes. Hello, Tom. Hello. Well, just for that, I mean, how are you doing? Exciting display. Yes, pardon the occasional peel of thunder. We've got a thunderstorm coming in down here in Texas. Okay, so if you knock offline, we'll understand. Well, yeah. No, don't understand. Just sympathize. I'll sympathize for sure. Yes, you will. So one of the things that I'm very interested in and that I've spent a lot of time working on is, you know, to what extent does technology, particularly digital technology allow us to rethink and break up the idea of courses in the first place. The idea of, you know, what it means to teach and what it means to, what it means to teach and what it means to structure an education. Maybe it's teams of teachers and all this, this, this sorts of stuff that, you know, where space and time used to be a big barrier. One of the things we've learned with COVID is that that doesn't need to be a barrier in the same way anymore. For instance, right now this week I'm meeting individually with all of my students and I've shut down, they're all virtual anyway. I mean, it's online on a schedule. But, you know, I shut down my classes this week because I think this is a better use of my pedagogical focus this week to sit down and have a real conversation with the students to see where they are to look at what they've done and to give them a good push for the remainder of the semester. So the question I have is, to what extent have these institutions you've looked at been able to systematize this kind of rethinking of what a course even means or credit hours or these sorts of things which are a product of literally butts and seats. Have we lost Steve completely? No, I don't think so. Can he hear us or just, could I see joint podium in the middle? No, he just, there he is. Reloading. Did you hear the middle of that? Steve, were you able to hear that? It may be that his phone... I shouldn't have said anything about the storm coming in because I'm not the one who... No, he just jinxed us, I think. I jinxed Steve at least. Well, let me take a look and see if he's on here twice. It looks like no. It looks like that's actually a frozen image. Yeah, at least it's weird and strange. Steve, there he is. I had to do it twice. I heard the questions, great question. I looked at five institutions, two of which were purpose-built, created right from the first days of planning to be exceptionally effective in terms of quality access. And in the case I'm going to talk about, affordability was also an explicit goal. In fact, one of the first things they did in trying to conceptualize the institution was to decide what the tuition was going to be. And then they tried to develop an institution that could thrive at that comparatively low level of tuition. And that's what's called the College for America programs at Southern New Hampshire University. They're the only one of the six which grappled with the questions that you just raised. In fact, when they first started the program, the word course wasn't in their vocabulary. They were talking about competences to be acquired, projects to be worked on, sort of ancillary online materials that students could use to get themselves ready and an overall competence map that derives partly from the AAC and use essential learning outcomes and partly from more job-oriented competences. What they discovered was that it was very difficult to articulate with a larger system of expectations on the part of potential students and the regulatory system to not have the word course there. So they would bundle three projects together that had related competencies and they would call that a course and or three credits for it. But that's the only overlap with conventional terminology. Things never met with each other, online or face to face. The interaction was entirely or virtually entirely student to supervisor, student to coach student to counselor. And that really points out in terms of assumptions about quality and learning and so on, the big difference between college for America and the other institutions, the other five. The other five, you'd find much more familiar because they have a big emphasis and in a lot of different ways more even than traditional institutions, they take advantage of students, interaction, students working in teams on projects, peer critique of one another's work, debates, competition, simulations. But if you're a competence based institution and aren't, you know, absolutely gigantic, you're giving up most all of the possibilities for student-student interaction, which is really powerful engine for it's involved almost all the high impact practices that had been named involved some form of student-student interaction. So the claims on quality for college for America rest more on the competence definitions, on the assessments that are being made of student competences and the ability to ideally introduce students to challenges that they're just about ready to tackle. They've got to learn more, but not so much more that it would seem impossible to them. So it's a different kind of claim on what makes this kind of learning effective. And I think because college for America is kind of unique in my view, it was almost the best conceivable way to implement competence-based education that was likely to have a claim of being effective in the same ways that these other five could be because at least they had problem-based learning. Everything is about working on a project and learning what you need to do to do that project and the projects are made as real or realistic as possible and as relevant to the students work because all of these students are employed almost all the students are employed by companies that are clients of College for America. So College for America one of the other differences is they don't recruit new students. They recruit new employers and then the employers make this education available more or less as a benefit. Students may have to pay something or the students may find that their tuition benefits from the employer completely cover us. The other thing I was thinking about there was one of the big problems with the triangle is efficiency and the big cost driver in most institutions or one of the big cost drivers in a lot of institutions is the cost of faculty. Are there ways in which we can make faculty more efficient than tying them to a 16 week course with its ebbs and flows and in terms of just the way the work is structured. I find that as a faculty member there are significant chunks into the semester where I'm like yeah this is a time when I don't really need to be involved in this and I could be helping other students or I could be doing other things in the process. I could be more modular too not just the class because that's the thing I haven't looked into that too much at Central Florida but there might well be examples of that because so many faculty have had so many years getting experience teaching blended courses and online courses and developing materials that are useful online that they could well de facto be doing what you just described. I just didn't think to ask. I think that's a good question. I've actually embedded a librarian in my course on my own originally and she tackles some of the research needs that the students have and these aren't things that I can't do but it's a load that I can take off my plate so I can focus on the things that she can't do and she's physically well physically digitally in my course and can be accessed by the students anytime and she comes in and gives some guest talks over the course of the semester too or people like that and actually put together teams and if we could spread out the workload I think we could make the whole system a lot more efficient. College for America when it was designed originally they wanted a $3,500 term tuition they raised it some it's 4,000. They felt that they couldn't have a conventional faculty with and do the other things at that level so they have sort of staff experts they use a lot of ad junks for different purposes when I say adjunct I just mean somebody who's part-time either doing this as part of or on top of another job some of them are specialized as assessment people some are providing academic coaching for students one of the things that would really needs to be looked at closely in the years to come is what are the trade-offs of not having a faculty that has the responsibility and the education to guide this sort of continual redesign. Do you lose anything or gain anything by investing that in conventional staff roles where my other things obviously there's no tenure. It's a combination of things and I think you still have to have that faculty member at the center of the universe but so much of what faculty end up using their time for has absolutely nothing to do with their area of expertise and in many cases even teaching or at least not teaching what they really their areas of expertise and so it's more efficient in my mind to for me to have the librarian as it better because that's the focus of her inquiry and we could also go interdisciplinary and have teams of English professors working together with government professors to teach composition and writing in a political science context or something like that where those loads are distributed out in different ways that I think would be really effective and I think at the end of the day if you structure it right I think that would be a good possibility but I'm eating up enough time speaking of accessibility I want to give somebody else accessibility to the forum. Thank you. We'll make it more efficient for you Tom. Thank you. Thank you Brian. Don't get fried. Don't get sussed. Steve one quick question you mentioned that this one project the lack of course language was that accreditors students they were shying away from something that was so innovative they literally couldn't relate it to anything in their past experience. So it was partly the students I think the creditors to regulators were expecting to see three credits for what and if you think about it the sort of the pure learning has nothing to do with time on task. You know for this credit you may be if you already had that competence you can just put in a relatively small amount of time to demonstrate that you've got it but in order to exist sort of exist comfortably with potential students with employers and with regulators having some way of saying we're not going to talk literally about hours. Well thank you thank you I want to make sure you didn't miss that point and everybody this is again your time to ask Steve your questions and to put forth your ideas as well you saw how easy it is to ask a video question and also to ask a question by chat in fact let me just I wanted to hoist one question that came up this was about alumni I can find the source of this this is Kay Hampshire who asked how do alumni organizations impact either positively or negatively this iron triangle of accessibility quality and affordability I think it could go either way I never looked at that question so I'm just imagining it at this point but let me go back to a very basic thing which is why do people think it's an iron triangle and why are they wrong I think the intuitive idea is that quality is somehow related to the quantity and value of academic resources divided by the number of students so in that model of quality you want to maximize the time which is one of those academic resources faculty time for each student and anything about reducing that amount of time or guarantee of lowering quality in one of the most subtle and most widespread ways of reducing time for student of course is to add more students the problem is that that whole model is fallacious that isn't the way that learning happens learning results from what students do and only from what students do as Herbert Simon once said which means that you can have institutions with relatively small comparatively small amounts of resources per student where the student learning is more effective than it is in institutions with larger amounts of faculty time and other resources per student the national survey of student engagement Nessie has some research that shows that to be true and I think in different ways these institutions demonstrate that too alumni that don't react negatively to somewhat changed ideas about what class looks like and who are supportive first of all financially one of the things that I've seen for years and I spent 20 years of my career as a funder of innovations in higher education was that institutions would do some things that I thought were really spectacular in terms of improving the guts of teaching and learning in that institution and then I would look at their websites and their ways of describing themselves you know the Wikipedia article about them to choose one small example and would make no mention at all of what these pioneering practices were which meant that they were depriving getting more alumni support financial support support in terms of alumni time in terms of these scaling up new practices that's a real problem I can see that there that was a really good question thank you for adding that angle we've also had several people asking a question around quality and I want to bring up the one from John Henry Stites who asked this I'm going to dive in your initial temporary asked how quality can be measured how do any of the six institutions measure quality outside of time on task that's a that's a wonderful observation about time on task because I don't believe any of them do that and yet that's a nice evidence-based way of measuring quality is looking at time on task especially to give even a little higher and say engaged time on task the institutions I won't say they've got six different ways of measuring quality but it's more than two or three Georgia State for example thinks about quality primarily in terms of graduation rates they started this journey with graduation rates that were about six year graduation rates that were about 25% and even lower graduation rates for students for underserved groups that of African American students starting at Georgia State back in the late 90s only half of them reached the end of their freshman year and they stopped one year's oh no their measure of quality and their measure of equity are related to each other looking at the overall graduation rate and by the way this is the assumption below this I don't know if it's an assumption or fact the fact is that a lot of what Georgia State did was to try to improve teaching and learning and so therefore a lot of the credit and recent graduation rates has to do with increasingly effective instruction as well as some things that they did that are more you know student support or any kinds of steps as much as possible they were trying to improve graduation rates by improving teaching so their measure was graduation rates of that and their measure of improved equity was bringing to be the same as the students from privileged groups or more privileged groups which they've achieved they're all the way up there the Black students and Caucasian students graduated at the same rate from Georgia State and keep in mind a lot of people would assume especially in there with the old model of the Iron Triangle you would assume that anything other increase the graduation rates for white students the gap would remain but that's not what happened at Georgia State graduation rates went up some black students graduation rates went up a lot after 15 years 20 years of effort to where they're now identical that's fantastic so that's one answer to equality and Governor State and in a very different way their definition of equality would tie more to evidence-based practices high impact practices well designed ways for cumulative learning across as students progress through a degree program that one is more Governor State the teaching learning effective teaching learning practices being diffused that's more Central Florida and I've already mentioned College for America which is competencies and whether students have mastered each competence simple excuse me the College for America only has two grades if you want to call it a grade mastery or not yet students can try again do something different see if they can learn more grade mastery the second time very different sense of quality than the other institutions that's interesting not yet suggests that kind of asset based mentality you're on the way that's true I have no mastery of Korean not yet that is good there was a follow up question for this and this came up in the chat from a few people and wondering about QM and hang on one second there's some discussion about QM some QM fans so what do you think of the role of quality matters in this do these three institutions just not use QM or is that something we should think about I know Central Florida is a participant in QM and I just never looked to see whether the other five are the quality matters program has played a really positive role over the last 20 years in helping institutions and faculty connect evidence based teaching and learning practices with online learning rather than seeing online learning as a cash cow where the quality is as low as you can get away with QM has really been running counter to that and there's a lot of applause for that I will say modestly that one of the two funders that I worked for I think is I recall helped QM get started it's a great example of a small grant leading to a large scale long term change in practice QM has done a great job that's a wonderful transition to the question I was going to ask but before I do that let me just say to everybody we've got about nine minutes left so this is a great time for you to put forth your questions for Steve Ehrman about these issues if you'd like him to dive into one of these schools more closely if you'd like to address some of the other different parts and pieces of this from alumni and technology to accreditors this is your chance it's even easier still the podium here is open if you'd like to just grab that teal-colored box and start talking now while people are formulating their last questions I'd like to ask one of myself which is in the futures angle how can looking ahead say ten years what's a path forward for getting these innovative practices out into other campuses on Twitter we have one of our Scots friends said this won't happen these are pools of activity but the overall ecosystem doesn't want to change how can I prove him wrong and cheer him up and how can we get these kind of broken iron triangles out into the rest of higher education I call it rubber triangles to some extent because there's a whole, especially in this stage where I don't know, I guess 10, 15 institutions I hope I'm wrong about that I hope it's more are beginning to make progress of this sort I'm hoping that one of the messages of the book will help which is that it's likely that the large majority of institutions have made at least some progress in this direction but they just haven't realized it yet and if they begin to see that they already have assets in place things they've done either recently or things that are long term strengths of their institution they may feel it's easier to take another little step and that was one of the things that I learned from the four institutions that weren't designed from day one to be effective in these ways they started just by taking little steps which over 5, 10 years of a bigger puzzle and when they did begin to see oh, we're already part way we've already had successes we've already been seeing that it's possible and now that we can see where we are going in a more holistic way now we can really step on the gas and I think all these institutions had this sort of inflection point where they realized that they could try they could aim their sights a little higher and they could see what the other institutions that they would make it so starting small and then once you've done that successfully then realizing it and saying hey we can go even further and they're picking up the speed one of the other points that I mentioned earlier response to a question was the importance of boasting about what your institution is already doing I think the more institutions that look at this analysis and realize how important it is to improve quality not just access and not just affordability but all three and that they can do it already there are things they're already doing that they can boast more about I think that might begin to change the popular conception that's far too widespread these days that college education is a commodity where you invest as little as possible whether you are tax payers or people paying tuition or whatever in order to get the degree that it's the degree itself not the education that's what's valuable so seeing progress is being cheaper and cheaper and worse and worse education we got to get that out of the way and have institution boasting about not just how well their students are doing after graduation but what exactly emerged from the experiences that they had as students what they were able to do even in first year to working on for example real and realistic problems and making a difference and then getting better and better as evidence for example and there are e-portfolios and a lot of institutions are developing toward programmatic e-portfolios which is to say what they now do and what their intellectual capabilities are developing to become there are a lot of potential ways in which we can begin to change the consciousness of the wider world potential students, employers regulators, accreditors that were already on the way and if that begins to happen then you'll that's where you begin to see the neighborhood begin to flip in the middle of that phase change now we have to be patient I mean I think one of the biggest lessons for me having come from a grant making background I tended to see improvements in terms of two or three year time chunks and people applying for grants tend to think about what can we do in this short amount of time and then now we've got to propose something new different grant or the new provost comes in the new president comes in and said the only way we can make our contribution clear is to do something quite different from what's been going on the institutions that I study are really marked by the continuity of effort the cumulative building piece by piece of these larger constellations of institutional strengths that together improve quality access and affordability and mentality about what you're doing and that takes years to develop you know you can't say we're going to start years of patient effort today it's much better to say we started years of patient effort about five years ago here's what we've done so far now let's keep going let's keep gradually raising our sights and we're going to have a terrific answer and I want to say something about it but two questions just popped up and I want to make sure people get to ask these questions this is great Steve this comes from Charles Finley at Northeastern and Charles asks I wonder what role fraternities and sororities play in creating support and pure learning to achieve a quality experience for their members they do more than just party that's a question you need to answer to the majority across institutions the institution where I went to school as an undergraduate had a strong fraternity system and the fraternities emphasized academics that wasn't the only thing that they were doing they also were having their parties and so on but one of their selling points to potential pledges was look what we can do for you academically that's a good Again Charles, that's a really good question and that but it does break down at that small level Let's see if we can sneak in one more question under the wire another good one This comes from John Becker at VCU. Hey John and John says CFA doesn't see FAA doesn't have great graduation rates. Does that matter in the quality conversation? That's a really good question In my I don't know is the answer of John. I'm afraid the So many students are part-time at CFA And virtually all of them are holding on to holding down full-time jobs So I don't think they could be measured by the same expectations as programs that are Serving students who are On the average closer to working really full-time one thing and their competence based structure And the fact that they've torn loose from semesters Also, I think If you want to say enables encourages Students to think more in task-oriented in terms of lesson when the task is going to be complete You're ending for mastery so it took you longer. You can still hit it I think from the point of view of a college for America and Southern New Hampshire University They would say this is an asset But instead of students getting through in a minimal way and finishing up not really knowing very much That their students whenever they graduate them will be more capable Now whether they are that's still, you know, that's a long way down the road a lot of research I think and hopefully more programs than just the one college for America It's it's it's it's strengthened its weakness in terms of my Collection is that it's it's so unique. It's much more different from the norm than any of the other five even gutman is Much more like a conventional college than college for America is John that's that's very quick And Thank you for so many great answers. We're we're out of time We have to wrap things up But I wanted to thank you not only for putting up with technological problems But just for answering so honestly so deeply and so generously This is a terrific book friends. And thank you Stephen for joining us to discuss it um, let me Do people have my email? Because I want to I didn't share that Yeah, the email in the um chat room I also want to one thing that we didn't talk about um That I think people would be really interested in is um Why is it so urgent? For colleges to improve quality that part of my book is on the stylus website uh in your um pr brian for this um Uh for this webinar you include a link to the stylus page With information about my book reviews and and so on um There's a link where you can freely read chapter one Which is the chapter that lays out all the arguments for why is it so important to improve quality? Why the fact is our quality level currently far less than we think it is Um as well as the urgency of equitable access and the urgency of affordability Well Again, I second that um, those were great links and um, and you are a great guest Um, we can we hope that your next um your follow-up for this the next three or so case studies whatever form they are We really look forward to seeing them. Thank you. This has been a great I've had a great time. I don't know if you can do this, but I'd be happy to stay online Since I robbed people You didn't rob anybody I'm going to need to wrap up, but thank you. Thank you for your offer. We know how to find you. Yeah We uh friends looking ahead, uh, I just want to mention that we have a a set of uh Topics coming up including uh more and rethinking learning uh on disability and classes on eco media literacy Also, if you want to keep talking about this like how to define quality successfully What the role of quality matters is the role of alumni the role of fraternities and sororities Please tweet at us use the hashtag f tte You can tweet at me brian alexander or schindig events or hit my blog for more conversation about this If you'd like to look at our previous sessions where we've touched on different parts of this including quality Including affordability. Just head to tinyorl.com slash f t f archive We've got 275 sessions to choose from In the meantime, thank you all so much for the really really good questions and thoughts We really appreciate it. We really appreciate your patience your flexibility We can only explore the future of higher education with all of you And thank you for thinking of all of us and thinking with us until next time. Stay online and stay safe Bye. Bye