 Thank you. There are three names on the bottom. Two of the three names are present here, Fred Möller. And they know that he's biting his middle finger and that he's biting his thumb. Well, the agenda for this talk is as follows. Our first one will sketch you three scenarios in which we think about who we are, at the opening of the first two elements, and the main subject of this talk is about research. We have undertaken, and we still undertaken, about preferences for each of the scenarios and what affects the presence and the peeling of these scenarios for potential customers of the Open University. Those results of this research will be presented, and some conclusions we will end with. Well, first something about our history on OVR at the Open University. The first experiment started in 2006. We called it OpenR. OVR in the Netherlands has another connotation, which has a completely different meaning than Open University. So it will be called as OpenR, more open with means in the Netherlands. And the goal of this experiment was to find out if offering free courses would affect widening participation in higher education. Because of the results of this experiment and the experiences we had, there was a task force which got the time to think about possibilities that the OU could be more doing with OVR and not at the outskirts of the OU, but in the heart of the OU. And that was the task force. And it resulted in an experiment which I will talk about later on. And the research I'm talking about now is started in 2010. It was the title 2000 OVR Business Model for the OU in the National Context. And I will talk about part of the research. Before I want to start with this research, something about an OU educational model because it differs from what regular universities like MIT or the United States or what university is offering. What we offer is supported open learning or tutored self-study. We have high quality learning materials which I will talk about later on. It is developed for independent learning. The student should be able to take this topic and learn the content without or with as less as possible contact with tutors. And these integrated dialectics and tutoring elements are an integral part of the learning materials. When you think about and we think about open education, you have the OVR at one thing and open learning services which open not all, should have to be free. There are services all the way complementary to OVR where you pay for it and where variety of services is listed there. Well, now about the research. There are three scenarios which we wanted to research. The current scenario, this is the model which the OU is using now. We are offering short courses like open learning, those are 25 study hours which can be taken in study and it is more or less for marketing purposes. There is also a 10% scenario which say for each course we offer, for each course 10% is offered as OVR. And there are currently running two pilots which are using this model, learning in technology and informatics to find out what does it mean in development of the course but also in offering additional services and so on. And there is a 100% scenario which is currently under study and that all the course materials are offered open but with a product using split component model which I will talk about later. The research was commissioned by the OU and L and this research was performed by the Institute of Center Data, the Research Institute of St. Tilburg University. More schematic about the three scenarios. What you see here is how a course is built up, a course in the current situation. You see the content which is the bear content. You see some exercises, practices, self-test, those elements. You see the didactics and the guidance, the tutoring which is also part of the course and you see the assignment examination and additional services like tutoring, meetings regularly with students, communities, etc. It does not say that each course has 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 of those building blocks. It can be 20, it can be 10, it can be whatever but it is only for the sake of knowing how the course is offered. The OU-R part is, so the short courses which is the mini courses in the current situation is only about this course. So this is the current situation in the 10% scenario. It looks almost the same as it was, but instead of the OU-R, as being a part of this OU-R, part of the course, this is the OU-R, but you see only the content, not any of the services, but still the content with the exercises, with the tutoring so that students can go to it, him or herself. And 100% so, and this is the split component model in contrast with the all-inclusive model which is actually in the other scenarios, you see the OU-R is only the content and the rest are offered apart, so split from the content. So in this way, you can offer the content for free, it means redesigning of the current courses instead of everything is woven in, everything is intermingled. You take out those technical elements and offer them apart from the content which makes it easier to offer only the content for free. And so when we talk about a 100% scenario, only the green parts, these blocks are offered open, the rest is not offered. The research question we had was okay, what will be now effects in combination of OU-R, additional services, the level of service, variations in pricing, on the behavior of students in terms of paid subscription, because especially when you offer the course 100% for free, all the content 100% for OU-R, it can have the effect that you say, okay, I'll take the OU-R, I don't bother about all the other services, and so instead of buying a course where I get all these learning materials also, I don't buy anything. And you want to see for what services were appealing to customers and what level of pricing, what combination of services will be unique, and also the comparison of the course is made in the 10% and 100% scenario. The design for this research, there were 97 cases constructed for comparison in each school. We've got six comparisons, and the comparison means we've got two cases, and he had to say which was his preference, and that was one question for us and the second question which we gave, what he had to say, what is the expectation that you actually will take the course in the third case. So I could say, well, this is my parameter, I won't ever buy this course, because whatever it is. Now, there is the reference option for each of these comparisons, that's 100% scenarios, and you see here the variables, which we wanted to know about the effects on the choices of the students. So the availability over here is 100% duration, so this is a study duration which more or less dependent, of course, about how many hours to read a student wants to study, because most of our students have jobs, are co-working, and have a family, et cetera. They are not regular students who go to the college, and they pay for their attendance. The amount of guidance on this is not imperative, proof of participation is a legal certificate, the density of guidance. Life of learners subscription is something which is a subscription, where for a little amount per month, students can access to several services. So this could be a pre-increase for life of learners who want, in a regular place, want to study for improving themselves, for instance, in a job. The fate of social media is not available in this reference option. The student can do the pace, he can do it himself, and there is this price. The experiment, the sample, has this, so we distinguish between three target groups of age. So gangsters, 25 years or less, 60, 50 years, and older than 50 years, the main or the most of our students fall in this category. Well, now results. The first result, which I will present, with all the other variables in the basic option, were the same, had the same value. We only differed in the variability of the few material. And we were asked, and it was asked, from which case do you prefer them? And you see that, overall, the 100% scenario is, for almost all situations, has little preference, little more. So this one is about 61% of the people, younger than 25 years, say, I would choose the 100% scenario, and 39% said I would choose the current scenario. And so, you see, this, keep in mind, this 100% scenario does not mean he hasn't have to pay anything. He still has to pay for those services. You've seen this basic option, the price was still, he had to pay for something. Well, the variations of the other influence of the other attributes, when you see price and amount of guidance, when you make variations in that, they have low positive impact in favor for this 100% scenario. The intensity of guidance is paid service as a negative, so when you differ, when you make variations in that variable, it has a negative influence in the choice of this 100% scenario. And the same is for the life on business subscription. Social media, which are, you don't have to pay for your opening of the register, to use it has a positive but low to medium effect on the choice for this 100% scenario. Then, the second question, what is the probability of taking the course? And we have, you see the results for each of these scenarios. So, again, only the probability of the open materials is the probability of change. The others are the same as the basic option. And you see that, well, in almost all age groups, in overall also, you see a little preference, so overall when the 100% scenario is a little more than 20% of the people, okay, when you offer me the 100% scenario, I would actually take the course and in the current situation, this is about 80% of the people who were asked for this research. The effect on a lot of other variables, the influence of the other attributes on this actual taking the course, well, you see the intensity of guidance is a medium positive effect for youngsters and the negative effect for the other age groups. Life on minimum distribution has for youngsters a low positive effect, but the others is negative, so it's not appealing to them and the social media is low to medium and what was remarkable was that the most appreciation for this social media was in this middle group. Youngsters have a low impact on their preference for the 100% scenario and medium and all the people also and you would probably expect that for youngsters it would be more appealing. Well, and the third result where they were asked, you have the choice of this only course or you can take only the free content. So this, what would you actually take the course? And you see here, three parts of each two comparisons where the scenarios, again the scenarios where again the favorability of open material was here the favorable, which is crazy. This is for the chance taking the only course in the current situation, the 10% and the 100% scenario, you see in each of these, and this, you see, the 100% scenario still has the favor of this going up, but when you ask for them, would you be happy with only the free materials? So we prefer the free materials instead of this open-use course that you have to pay for, you see there are little for the $75 and in the middle group there is something more, but still lower than the majority would choose to actually take the OU course and not be satisfied with only the open materials without any services or items. And also the conclusion in this that the choice for only free content shows little differences, you see, it was rising each group per age group but it was not a steep hill, it was very little, so otherwise it doesn't matter if you do only mini-courses, 10% or 100%, it has little influence on making courses, don't be afraid to share 100%, the conclusion we want to take. There is a note, the standard deviations are large, so this is something which has to be serious. These are the first reasons we are promising when you are a fan of this 100% scenario. Well, regarding the extra services, when you are very good at this, there is a guy whose life on learning subscription they show and tell him, but the life on learning subscription does not lead to an increase in your arms, which was, we couldn't understand, but the researcher, but that is the hypothesis, which we did research, the mightiness understanding of the life on learning and the differences within this question that people thought wrong about, what would it mean? There is further research, this is only quantitative research, but why things are as they are, we don't know, so this has to be done, so we have to look for qualitative explanations for you. Currently the same research is done, a sample of our students, who are already taking courses at the Open University, and we expect the results in November, and the total report of this research will be available in the first quarter of next year, this hour. Thank you. A pragmatic question. You showed us the revenue for the 100%, or at least you showed us the cost. I assume that part of the process here is taking each of the scenarios and seeing what the implications will be financially for the institution. Is that something you've already done, because it wasn't clear to me what finances were? No, this is only to find out if it is viable, if this research would have shown that no one would ever choose for paid courses or paid courses if you put every material on the back without all these technical elements, then you should not start with this. I'm very sympathetic to the irony that Open Educational Resources are more threatening in a certain way to Open Universities, but I'm also interested in the OLI, which is flourishing right now, but when their grant funding runs out, which is supposed to in the next year, how will they sustain, so it's the same question. I think this is really interesting. That is there for... MIT says we put all our materials free on the back, and they can do it because it is only the materials, but our current courses they have the teacher built in it, so you don't need the teacher anymore. Why would someone go to the OU if you put that free, and therefore, never, because then we can we kill ourselves. This is a very important question for all of the Open Universities. There's a lot of fear, just because of the... you could loss a lot of money because people not enroll anymore, but take the materials for themselves and that's fine, so this result was not expected so far, so you're very surprised by this more expensive result for the university scenario, so it should be where the university scenario is connected to the chain, which means the type of course we have to, because all of them are not equal, or not in a legal position as the regular universities who are offering content only of course have a classroom situation in addition to the content. You'll have to reduce your cost as part of the... You said with the 100%, it's sort of self-determined, because they're not getting the tutorials or how to keep up with the current model. How far does that go? It can go very far. I'm not sure that maybe you know what we have, so then of course I can do 10 years about the course or is there a border? Normally not. You see, because what a strength in your model is you could be showing the same components, the material so your updating is keeping track of your updating for your regular students, but if you allow only 10 years, it sort of gets a bit out of sync. 10 years is... Most of the students when they buy a course, they do it within a year, but this is the majority. I realize you haven't done the quality degrees. Do you think the idea of being self-determined was a strong incentive for people? It is what our students want. Most of the students they have a situation they choose for their own university because they can determine themselves when to start, the pace they can determine themselves. They don't have to be every Tuesday evening in some lecture hall but they can do it in their own room at home. So those elements are appealing for our students and that includes the service they make. You can plan, for the next 6 weeks I will do this course but then something happens with your children or something happens on your job so you don't have the time which is much less to plan than there for regular students who only study and nothing more at least in the Netherlands. I think in the US maybe it is something difficult. I will report for open education but I am wondering thoroughly to Ross's point is the price differential. We had a talk here earlier about students supporting they don't want the tablets and a lot of it complaints against the tablets were because of the pricing of the e-books and the things you could do and for this was there a big price differential? I should do it with the top of my head that there were two two prices the prices are now in half half price among the age groups it is hard to make a difference so maybe the pricing for the current scenario and the underpriced scenario is more or less the same there is no difference in the basic option in both cases you can buy additional services but of course that is for both cases the same so the pricing for the basic offering is for the current scenario and underpriced scenario is the same but your costs are different for a scenario your costs are quite different because there are different concepts but not in the content material but in the material on the side so it is split but it could be that in the course development those costs could be something higher than in the current situation where you don't have to think about to split those components but that is not to say it is only something higher it is not the same we can also use resources in a much easier way so it is not so sure that there will be more expensive at all take it to your questions I am across my mind I will read this question no thank you thank you