 I ask Maar Harbali to take the stage. I'm going to do a short introduction. For those of you who don't know, I can't imagine there's that many people in the audience that don't know her. But she's the associate professor of practice at the Centre for Learning and Teaching at the American University in Cairo. Among her many, many professional activities, she's international director of digital pedagogy lab, editor at the Journal of Hybrid Pedagogy, and she's co-founder of Virtually Connecting, who are running a programme on site during the conference as well. I watched an interview with you a couple of years ago, and I know that will always send a shiver down your spine, because when people say that to me, it does me too. It was a great interview, though. And you were being interviewed by Howard Rheingold. And one of the things that you said that I loved was, I take a lot, but I give a lot. And I love that sentiment, I love the generosity and passion for learning that Mahar gets over with that. Her work's concerned with the contradictory nature of open practice, and she's spoken about the arrogance and vulnerability of online participation, and also the ways in which the most vulnerable people online are also those who have the most to benefit from being online. So we're proud and delighted to have a woman here today to open the conference, who models and personifies the open practice she talks and writes about, and is an active global participant working and learning in open networks. So please, big welcome for Mahar. Yn ymlaen i gweithio. How are you all? It is such an honour to be here, talking to a lot of people I've been learning with and from for such a long time. Thank you so much for having me. I just learned recently how small the core team of Alt are, and I'm really impressed that you can have such an impact with such a small core team and to be empowering so many other people, and I think that's a model a lot of us can learn from. So... My keynote is entitled Hiding in the Open, and it is just a coincidence today that my husband and daughter and I were sitting in this sort of enclave in the hotel, and there was a quote there about how sometimes you need to sort of retreat in order to create, and then you go back and out in the open, and so I thought that was very convenient given the type of this keynote. The slides for this keynote are up. I did that because I don't have my laptop with me because of the ban, but also because then if the slides are up, we can keep having this conversation beyond the keynote, and if I feel like we want to talk about something different today, I won't feel bad if I don't finish going through them or if I have to skip some of them, and you could also tweet to that, and I've also asked for feedback at the end, so you can put comments later whenever. And so when I was invited to do this keynote, I was like, dragon to me, I don't do OERs. Like how many people over here, how many of you were involved in creating something like 10 OERs or more? Quite a few people, right? And by limiting it to a license rather than a spirit. And all these other people I work with, so I'm not open on my here. What was I doing with Suzanne? And this one, keep your hands up. How many of you have needed to download a paper illegally for a need? If you don't have your hands up, there's something weird about you. So everybody has their hands up for this one. How many of you have fewer or no professional development opportunities in your country or city? Okay, so that's much fewer people, right? How many of you cannot travel comfortably because of young children? And I know some people like me have brought their children with them. And how many of you have had to suddenly teach a course about something that you're not a specialist in with very little time to prepare? Okay, Helen. Hi, sorry. So open can really empower anyone who goes through a lot of these things. Obviously when you don't have internet access, the internet type of open isn't going to work for you at that point. But it works open as it's more than just a connected type. And so openness can really empower in that way. But it's not necessarily a complete empowerment. And there's a threshold before which it's not going to empower you at all. And I'm just going to ask you, you're probably sitting next to someone you're comfortable with and I'm going to ask you to try to make yourself a little bit uncomfortable by turning around and saying hi to someone behind you who you don't know. And if you're virtual, check out who's using the hashtag. Okay. I love this noise. Okay, it looks like most of you are comfortable with that. I'm glad. That's great. That's great. I know. I know. Okay. I'm glad you guys had fun with that. And it looks like most of you are comfortable with that. But I was also thinking that any process can privilege some people over others. So if I had to turn around, I know half the people in this room. So it wouldn't have been as comfortable for me. I'm very extroverted, so that wouldn't have been a problem for me. Maybe for other people it would have been. And for some people just the act of turning around might be physically difficult. The ones who are just facing the front, they didn't have to make an extra effort. So any process that we ask other people to do or that we take part of differentiates between people, you just need to always be aware of that. And we know that, but I think knowing it is something and then applying it is something else. And a lot of what I'm going to say today, a lot of it is stuff maybe you already know. And recently, Jen Ross and Amy Collier published a paper which has half the ideas that I've got over. I'm like, hey, you could have waited like a couple of weeks and then it would have looked like they took it from me, but that's okay. But it means I think that a lot of us in this community are thinking along the same lines. But this one, I've been doing a lot of reading in preparation for this keynote. And if you're following my Twitter and my blog, you know that this is what I've been reading. Because I read obviously scholarly stuff, but this is what I have to do every night for my daughter. How many of you are fans of this series? I have a love-hate relationship with this series, including this particular book. Lilum is helpful and Jim Groom has a mic, but I'm going to... You do have it, right? You don't, you're supposed to have it. Someone was supposed to give it to you, but that's okay. So Jim volunteered to help me, but for this one I actually might take it myself. So I just made you get up for no reason. Who knows this story and would be willing to share a brief of what that story is to the rest of the group? Thank you. Does anybody know it? Now nobody knows it? Nobody knows it? I had a prize for the person who was going to help me to tell this story. Sorry? I have big children. Oh, your children are too big? I used to read this when I was a kid, but that's... Oh, I'm going to have to tell the story myself. So Lilum is someone who wants to be helpful all the time. But instead of being helpful, she usually messes things up. So, you know, she tries to help someone tie his shoelaces because he's very tall, and then she ends up tying the two shoelaces together so he falls over, and then she tries to help him with his bump, and then she bumps, she puts the plaster on his mouth instead of on his forehead, and things like that. And how does that kind of story make you feel? Anybody willing to tell me how that story makes them feel? Sorry? Get confident? Incompetent, right? And how do you feel about telling a story like that to kids? No, right? Why would you tell a story like that to kids? You don't want them to feel like they shouldn't be helpful. But I started to think, well, yes, my daughter is often trying to be... I don't like the little miss thing, but anyway, it applies for this particular one. My daughter is trying to be a little miss helpful. And a lot of the times, she messes things up, right? I'm like, oh, that's so nice that you're being helpful. I'm like, could you please stop trying to help me, right? But as I was thinking about this keynote, I realized that that's the way I feel about a lot of people in my life, especially men, especially white men, and especially men who are in a higher position of power. I'm not trying to be sexist, but it does turn out to be a lot of men. And they see a problem, and they think they're going to solve it. And they decide what the solution is, and they give it to me. I'm like, okay, take it. Look what I've done for you. And I'm going to say, that's so nice, but that's not what I want at all. And you didn't even ask me what I thought the problem was. You didn't ask me how I wanted to solve it. You didn't try to empower me to solve it. You just decided for me, and you went ahead and did it. And a lot of this keynote is about that kind of thing. And I'm not going to say that I don't do that either. So recently there was someone on crutches, on campus trying to open a door, and I was right next to her. And I just said, I opened it, and I'm like, let me help you. And she's like, I can do it. I don't just realize it. I didn't even wait to see if she could open it. I didn't ask her if she needed help. I didn't ask her what kind of help she needed. I just assumed that I know how to help, and it made me feel better. But that doesn't make her feel better, and we need to always check when we're trying to help someone. Are we doing what they need, or are we doing what we think is going to help us feel better? And when I was telling a colleague of mine this story, she told me about a day a beggar, an elderly beggar was by her. And she didn't want to do it, so she gave her an apple, because that's what she had. And the beggar started swearing at her, because she didn't have any teeth. So she couldn't do anything with the apple. And how often do we have an apple to offer someone, and that person doesn't have teeth? And we don't realize that. In a co-edited book, Rojief Djondani and his co-editor, right about openness is a gift, that you offer it to someone and then they're either going to accept it or not. But also the gift metaphor is really useful, because when you give someone a gift, is it something that you like or is it something that they like? I'm looking at people who have given gifts to and who have given me gifts, and what does the gift mean? And how do you decide what to give to each person, right? And so this next slide, I gave to Diana actually if I made a mistake this morning. How many people can read what's on this slide? Where are you, George? I know you're here. You can't read it? You kind of can. So this says, yna me'l amael y biniad, so yna me'l ymry'n mewn awa, and it means that deeds are judged by intentions. And I think, Alec and Josie, we're sort of talking about that idea of intentions, like we need to revise what our intentions are, but also how do you feel about just saying deeds are judged by intentions? Do I have a bit of a struggle with that, because I think working in Australia, I work a lot with Indigenous peoples in education, and my good intentions, when I first started, were often really wrong, and it was just like you were talking about the gift that you give that can't be used. It totally disempowered the people I was trying to work with, and so it bounced back and made me aware of my own colonialism and how deeply embedded that is in my thinking. So, yeah, I'm not sure I agree with that statement. Yeah, and this is actually a spiritual statement. So this is between you and your creator, but with human beings, I think, and I'll come to this in a minute. But when I was thinking about that, I remembered something in Arabic that the word naeya for intention has the past tense naewa, so intended, and the word for seed or nucleus is also naewa, which sounds very similar, and I wasn't sure if they came from the same root. And I asked our chair of our Arabic department, and this is what she told me, so a naeya or a seed, so it's both like an intention is something that's locked inside you and you have to spell it out so others know it, and exactly like a seed that's hidden inside the fruit, you can't see it unless the fruit is opened and it's similar with a nucleus, all right? And then if you look at, think about intentions of seeds that are hidden deep inside, you have to make those explicit and then you have to nurture them to get the fruit, and then I think you have to revise them also to make sure that the fruit that is your goal and your intention are meeting each other and the way you're nurturing it. And then it needs an entire ecosystem, it's not just you and your intentions, but there's an entire ecosystem you have to be aware of and there's symbiosis and competition and something went wrong with the slides there, but that's okay. And I believe that everyone in this room has good intentions, but are we all nurturing them in the way we want to? And every day I have to revise my intention and revise the way I'm doing them. It's different. Catherine, I'm quoting you here. Because intentions are not enough because openness can easily exacerbate inequalities, help reduce it, and Savasig was talking about how usually those most privileged continue to be privileged by open and then that it's a problem of race and gender and class and openness can perpetuate those. And then we need to reflect and repurpose and if it's not working for us, right? Because the rhetoric is not enough. And there's a lot of instances where our intention is to include people and then we end up excluding them and I have a history of doing that, quite a lot. One of which was, Rise of 14, which is one of, it was probably the first connectivist MOOC I've ever taken and I was trying so hard to just make sure everybody's included and in the end I think I ended up excluding a lot of people and in some ways I don't really understand how it worked but at least I try not to do that and I learn from it. And I think funding for education when it comes from outside, so similar to what you were saying, Janus, right? The funder decides what the problem solutions are and they decide what the priorities are. And then they direct the recipients to particular ways of solving the problems. And, you know, they also, by doing that, they make you rethink your realities and see your reality in a certain way because they keep funding the same thing and then you start to direct your efforts towards the thing that they're going to fund because otherwise you're not going to get funding for other things. And they often in the end, especially in Egypt, focus on tangibles so they will fund hardware for schools but they won't spend enough time focusing on the teachers and the culture and even helping them create the software and they train a few people and then they don't realize that those people are not going to train others because they train others, there'd be more competition over the use of those labs. And it's a complete disaster because then whatever it is they're funding, nothing really very good happens out of it, it's not scalable. And I don't know what their intentions are, honestly. But that's one of those situations where it doesn't always work out very well. And I'm clicking the wrong button or it just doesn't want to, okay. All right, and I blogged about... This is... Oh, I can just leave it. But I'm going to use it right now, so... I blogged about this Egyptian saying which I misquoted, but never mind. It's about when you try to fix the shirt and you spoil the trousers because you're not managing all the complexity of a situation and not realizing the consequences. And I'm going to ask some people from the audience to help me give examples of these and I already blogged about this so I told people that they're going to be on here. But some people aren't here. So, Sherry Spillett and Chris Gillier, both separately, talked about how we give up our data and thus our freedom for the sake of open. And that's riskier for some people than others, right? And it's what you give up and who you are in the world. And that's something that, you know, when you ask your students to be open, you don't always consider or you need to consider a lot more, like Robin DeRosa was talking about a student who was in the witness protection program. Asking her to blog, you have no guarantee of her safety, right? Oh, there is feedback, isn't there? Christian, where are you? You're up. So, hi, everyone. My name is Christian Friedrich. And I think I'm up here because I was supposed to share a quick story of a Ignite talk I gave at DML last year, 2016. And I talked about access to higher education for refugees and the efforts we're trying to make in Germany there. So, basically, we're claiming to be an open system and we claim to open up higher education for refugees. But what we actually do is we present information in a very one-directional way and claim to give access where we actually don't do that. And that's basically, I think, the gist of my talk, I think, if you wouldn't want anything to add. Thank you. It's Sheila here. Yes. Mae'r person. I was really taken by, I have a post. I often think with openness that there's a whole wardrobe of open. I look there, but I have nothing to wear because sometimes I don't feel I have anything open to say or open to give, so sometimes quite confusing. There's almost too much stuff there that I don't really know what to do with it. Myrra Vogle can't be here, but she was talking about how when we asked our students to work in the open, when they're working not in the open, there's a lot of conditions of fair use where they can use copyrighted stuff and then suddenly now they're in the open, that you have to add that layer of making sure your students understand copyright. That's not necessarily something you were ready to spend time on in your course, so that's another interesting thing. And Alec, the copyright police thing, are you happy to talk about that quickly? I guess it relates to this theme of how political open is. There's an argument made by Professor Neville Kincoran, who's an Israeli legal scholar looking at open licensing rules, and she says that the idea behind Creative Commons and other open licenses was sort of to liberate people from all these challenges of dealing with copyright, but in the end the system is pretty complicated and still based on law and forces you basically to become even more diligent and in the sort of radical scenario you become kind of a copyright police that mainly checks whether the sign is correct and someone didn't break rule number seven. And there is some. She identified this several years ago and there's still no visible solution to this challenge. I'll keep the mic with you. Now you've got two mics, so much power. Okay, and of course Alec also brought up the issue of sustainability of open, that's a huge issue, so I'm not going to make you talk about that. I'm sure a lot of us here are aware of that. I had Francis Bell to think for the second half of this keynote, which she doesn't really know, but you reminded me that Sam Sharma and I had started reading about the idea of a post-colonial MOOC and we've actually got two chapters that are in closed books about just looking at open and MOOCs in a post-colonial lens. And one of the ways we did that was to look at curriculum theory and put that on top of that. And the next part is just part of it. It's not everything that we've written about, but I thought it would be useful to share it in an open way since those book chapters are closed, right? And we talk about the concept of thinking about open as instrumental versus open as practised. And when you tell someone about publishing open access, sometimes you tell them, because you're going to get cited more. And that's a very instrumental reason, and even though it's useful that some people will be impressed by that and that's what will motivate them, I think hopefully most of us have a praxis orientation and we mean to empower and we have a social justice reason for going open. But they are quite different worldviews that they can coexist in some instances. It's just which one we prioritise and which one is on the top of our heads. And when you think about access as a human right, and you talk about it as demand for democratic participation, global inclusion and economic justice, you need all these different angles to it. Something did go wrong with the slides, Martha, when we downloaded them, but that's okay. These are on Google Slides and they look good on Google Slides. Just powerful and just messed it up a little bit. And is there a lot of... Yeah, oh, I knew this was going to happen. Cassano, see you and help me? Oh, right. Is it okay now? Yes, thank you, Laura. There's a lot of different ways of looking at the curriculum. Of course, open isn't a curriculum, obviously. It's something else, but it can be like if it's a MOOC, then you can call that a curriculum or just our approach to open in general. We can talk about all these different ones. I'll focus on the hidden and the content-oriented views, and hidden could be intentionally hidden or it could be just unacknowledged. And so things that are... This course is of open, it could be hiding exclusions. And examples, for example, is that public education in Egypt is supposed to be free. Books that are copyrighted get printed and sold at very cheap prices, and copyright isn't standing in the way of Egyptian higher education at all. So that material OER doesn't really make a huge difference. A lot of university lecturers create their own notes that are contextualized and simplified for that audience, and that's not what open education is going to do for them. And these people make money from that because they don't get very good salaries. And so I don't know how useful open education would be in that particular context. And there's something else that I'll talk about later, but there's a lot of plagiarism happening where I am, where even the more senior academic takes the work of a more junior academic and publishes it in their own name. And so when I was telling people about author aid, which is a website that helps scholars from developing countries get mentorship, I said, what if that person steals my work? How could I even consider sharing my stuff with someone else? And that's just a culture that... And you're not going to stop that by asking one person to be open, right? It's a lot more than that. Now what? There's still a noise. Okay. And hiding the open is that a lot of analysis of things like social network analysis and learning analytics, looking at behavior doesn't at all show you what's happening behind the scenes between people in private. And a lot of what makes openness work is this private communication. And a lot of people who are new to open don't realize that. They see this noise on Twitter or on Facebook and they don't know that behind all that, there's a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes. And that's what makes it possible. And that every minute one of us spends doing something open as a moment of contingent scholar could be making money. And that every time we ask someone who doesn't have a regular salary or a secure job to do something open, then that's actually their livelihood that we're asking them to take away from and that a mother could be spending with her child. So that's family time that we're asking people to take away. And again, you know, it does them as rampant in certain places. When someone says they're going to publish something CC0, I say then you're not worried that someone's going to take your work and call it theirs. You're so confident that this isn't going to affect you. That's how you can do a CC0. Like doing it with an image is not a big deal, but doing it with like a big body of work, that's a huge, huge thing. And we also, when we do things open, are students going to have access to those things? Do they have their own devices to be able to use things? Do they have a home environment that allows them to just sit and spend that time? Do they, if you have like five kids in a house and all of them have to watch something online tonight for an assignment tomorrow, how many laptops or devices do they have to be able to do that? And is there gender equality at home? Well, the parents allow both the boys and the girls to spend as much time doing that. Because MOOCs have a lot of, MOOCs and online education in general, I did my master's online and my PhD remotely, so I only visited Sheffield like a couple of times a year. So I had the access to the infrastructure and I had my own dedicated devices. I had to use mobile a lot because I had a young child and so moving around and being with her, I couldn't carry a laptop all the time. I had the digital literacies, but the understanding family members, on and off, right? Sometimes they were understanding, sometimes they weren't. Oh, your daughter's sick, you take care of her. Oh, you want to take her to a daycare? She's only one and a half years old, how could you do that? Oh, you know, she left us after dinner and she went and worked on her computer. I got a lot of that throughout my seven years of doing my PhD. Now you know why it took so long. I also got a lot of help, but still, you know, it's not like perfection. And open isn't free. I'm not even going to say free as in beer because if you gave me free beer, I wouldn't take it. I hid that example. But it's not free as in zero dollars or pounds or euros or whatever. Because I don't own my domain, I rent it. And I wrote a blog post about that. I got 50 plus comments and a response from Audrey and none of them really answered my question. And thanks to Francis Bell, we're going to republish that on Femeth Tech and I hope that we can start thinking about it from scratch again. Some people in my part of the world who are not poor, they have internet access, they're well educated and they don't have access to a credit card. And we talk about domain of one's own as empowering. And I understand the part where it's empowering away from the money with the fact that some people just can't afford it. And what does it mean that we try to encourage students to do that? We tell them that this is the way to be empowered on the web. But the way of the web requires you to keep paying year in, year out for domain name, that's the way of the internet. And we're just not doing, I mean, I don't know if we can challenge that, but I think we need to be aware of that. And so I'd be happy for you guys to continue this conversation. And Francis, this is gone out, right? It's on Femeth Tech now. It will be soon, okay, all right. And also not free as in Libra because we're not equally vulnerable to harassment and trolling and so on. And there's a quote down here that got lost, but it's about, it's Chris Gillir and Hugh Cullig about our ability to be free online. We're not all equally able to be free online. We're not equally surveilled online. Like the risks that someone who looks like me takes in doing certain things is very different than the risks of someone else doing it. It's not moving. And there's differences between nations and within nations, right? And this is just something about the spirit of open versus licensing. If you can do something a CC by, but it's very difficult for someone to read, oh my God, I'm running out of time. I'm going to take five more minutes, I think. Or is an article or a video done in a very accessible and open way, but no derivatives, more open. And is sometimes doing something, no derivatives, giving someone more confidence to say what they want, knowing that someone cannot take it out of context. Because that's what we do with virtually connecting videos. We say be yourself and be social, but we're not going to allow, we're going to do it, but we're not going to tell them they can do it, to openly just take it and take it out of context and use it. Because me as a woman, I do things on virtually connecting, that if you take out a context, it can be used against me. I don't want people to feel like that's a risk they can take. Now curriculum is often looked at as content in general, in schools and in universities, and also in open. And who's privileged when we do that? You all know the SOA story? Students from the School of Oriental and African Studies who said, how come you're just letting us read white philosophers when we're studying Oriental and African Studies? They should get a chance to be critical of both their own culture, but also the dominant culture to be empowered, but then also get philosophers from their own culture. And of course, with MOOCs and OERs, who decides which content gets to be an OER or MOOC? And I get that decision in my own work. And then a lot of efforts to join, to reach developing countries, say, oh, if they don't have infrastructures, we'll put it for them on a CD. You're disempowering them, you're not giving them a choice to choose what they want to find online. But even when they do that, how much of the content online is in their own language? It's mostly in English, right? And then, you know, to be able to express ourselves in English when we're not native English speakers, we need to sort of say things in a way that's understandable, and that way, we're sort of not really expressing what we were saying in the first place. And you have to insist, like someone like, hey, most of what I publish is in English, that's how I get power. But then that just sort of diminishes my own mother tongue. And I grew up in a British school, and our form of resistance in the school is to have to develop American accents. And it really annoyed our teachers. We weren't allowed to speak Arabic, but we all had American accents. But the other thing is that I got used to hearing my names said incorrectly. So Anglo people say my name mahali. That's not my name. My name is mahali. It's an open sound. There are no weird letters or phonemes in it. Just mahali. It's just quick and open of mahali. OK, so now you know. I'm not talking about 1973 in British history. I'm talking about Egyptian-Israeli history. And in 1973, there was a war in October. In Egyptian Wikipedia, or non-Egyptian Arabic, but obviously someone Egyptian wrote this. In the Arabic Wikipedia, Egypt won that war. Egypt has a bridge in the name of 6 October, a suburb, it's a national holiday, we celebrate it. In the English version, it's a military victory for Israel. And that's history, and that's what Wikipedia does. And believe me, something like Federated Wiki, which allows different versions, doesn't solve that problem because if someone like Audrey, sorry to pick on you, and someone who nobody knows have different versions of the thing, who are people going to read anyway? If Audrey's is in English and mine is in Arabic, who's going to read, how many people are going to read hers and how many people are going to read mine? And we know this is true of history, but it's also true of everything. There's no problem of fake facts, they have the same facts. So the problem isn't with facts, it's about our interpretation of them and how language and culture affect what we can say about them. Because the power is in who gets to tell the story and who gets to decide when the story starts. Because that changes how you look at a story. And for most of us who are not from the US or UK, a lot of what's coming in digital, pedagogy and open is top-down and it's decontextualized and it's ignorant of a lot of our sensitivities, no matter how well-intentioned it is and we need to keep revising that. And I say this too because I'm in a westernized institution as well. I'm in an American university in Cairo, so I'm on both sides of this. And the most important thing for me is that to stop thinking about people who need access as that they need to consume, but that they also have the right to produce and to be empowered to produce their own thing, right? And the thing is sometimes we think, oh, we're going to solve the content problem by letting students find their own content. How many of you do that in their classes? Having students find their own content? Okay, quite a few people, right? But how do we know that students then won't still reproduce the dominant knowledge? Because Google is going to show them the dominant stuff. Again, like how are we going to, can we develop, and I think some of you might be thinking about this, how do you develop algorithms that don't show white professors when someone searches for a professor, right? How do you develop, how do you train your students and train yourself and modify your mindset to make sure that you're not always reproducing dominant knowledge? And I tried over here to stop people who are mostly not white males. Not succeeding very well, but still, just to think about who else is talking. All right. For example, Samantha van der Roosso blogged about, grant she has, where she had to use open education resources for her class, for a literature course. So there's a lot of public domain stuff, but who's is it, white people? And the marginalized authors don't have their stuff in the open. So then she's limiting what her students get exposed to. And some people think about curriculum as a product, but do we think of products that are effective? Can we imagine open as not the product of what it does, but the feelings that it can create and the empathy that it can create? And I think that's a lot of what the benefit of open is for me. Is that part of it? And then I'm going to share some good examples, I think, of people who try to do open in different ways. So most connectivist moogs focus on the process rather than the content. There's still power in there, but the e-learning digital cultures moog was one of those that was critical in the way it approached digital technologies and in the way it worked. But again, any process without intentional looking at the power dynamics, then it's not going to solve that hegemony at all and the need for teachers. Idrach is an Arab moog platform. I don't know if any of you have heard of it. So it does provide this Arabic content that's missing. But again, it often will be getting the content from the westernized privileged institutions and not just anyone, right? The commonwealth of open learning in, I think, they work in Africa, I think. And when they first did OER work, the OERs didn't get used by the teachers. And then they realized that they need to think of OERs as an empowerment process where everyone's involved. And regardless of what the output is, it might not be a lot, but as long as the process is in place, when they need something, they'll create it. And so they worked on that and they learned from that. Davidson College has this way of doing pop-up moogs. So if there's an urgent topic, it gets prioritized and then you don't have to usually go through a whole process by the time something is ready, it's too late to be beneficial. Digital writing month, anybody know what that is? That was an event we had a few years ago. OK, and they do it several times, but that year when I was asked to facilitate it, I got two co-facilitators. I asked for a diverse group of contributors. I did not just ask them to write something, I asked them to develop the activities for the group as well. And I thought if I have a diverse group of people to begin with, and that's going to help me get a diverse contribution instead of me as a facilitator deciding what people would do. And even though that worked out really well, and I think in terms of diversity you can just tell, but also there are limitations because we only picked people we knew, people who are on Twitter, people who are educators. So you get some of it, but not all of it, because it's intersectional, right? Virtually Connecting, which is something I'm a co-director of and my co-director is also here on him. A lot of people in this room are part of Virtually Connecting. The idea of Virtually Connecting is to allow people who aren't in the conference an opportunity to have conversations with people at the conference so that they're not just watching the keynotes that are live-streamed but also able to participate in conversations, like the holiday conversations that we have informally, which is the best part of the conference, right? And we've got it going on here. This is the schedule. If you see one in progress, pop in and come on the screen or if you're watching online and you want to join one, they're also live-streamed. But there are a lot of limitations to it and it reproduces privilege in some ways as well, and we try to be as inclusive as possible, but we fail a lot. And we're having a presentation just on that so that I don't spend my entire keynote talking about it. And that's after lunch today. And here's the thing. Inclusion is not something that we just say and we assume that by telling people to come in that we've included them. Because we're still including them in our own space, that we've designed, that we have all the power of the structure in. It has to be engineered. I don't like the word engineered, but this actually makes a lot of sense in that context. You need to design for it. And a lot of that means we design it with people, well, not for people. And so, here it is. I'm actually finishing on time, Josie. What is your action plan for this conference? What are you going to do to nurture your seeds? Whatever your intentions are and what are you doing to nurture them? I'm not saying you're not trying. I'm just reminding us all to just keep doing that. And Helen Bethan told me this in a private hangout that we mustn't be disabled by our own privilege and we mustn't allow it to disempower us from taking action. And Autumn says, that's not enough for us to show up, that we need to create the spaces for the lesser-heard voices. And there are a lot of people here presenting on that. I wish I could be in three places at the same time just to attend every single thing that I want to attend because there's so much talk about critical perspectives and equity inclusion. It's obviously clear from the way the program was designed. But there's so much here and so many stories that we can all learn from. And I'm looking forward to, even if I can't, go to all the presentations to see them later and to talk to you in the hallways. And I know that a lot of people in this room are of this kind. That you give that you may live or to withhold this to perish. It's not like... I don't think I could live by not being open. And my life would be very, very different without all these people in this room who have helped me learn the past few years. And a lot of them are hiding in this keynote already. And I'm sure I've forgotten someone. But you can tell there are a lot of people. OK. And thank you, Shukran. And she's given me to the both of you. Thank you ever so much. And we've probably got time for maybe one question for me and it's all comments about something that's hand shot up immediately at the back. So whoever's attached to that hand gets to answer the question by... By being that determined. Thank you. The quick hand catches... Please do introduce yourself. Yes, I will. Paul Baxidge. And wearing a suit, which maybe is the best context for my question. I've been agonising on and off about the no commercial restriction and looking at the commentary from various continents about the problems of this, including in the EU, where in fact some of us can't even use our own research results for European funded projects because of the NC restriction. I'm just wondering what your take is on that, especially in terms of yet another northern privilege that we tend to inflict some people who may well want to get better crops and can't even use the OER resources telling them how to do that. I'm actually not... I don't think I'll be able to answer that question. We're just having this discussion in the car, Josie and Alec and I, about the non-commercial. And I actually feel very strongly about the non-commercial because I have a very strong belief that if I'm opening myself up and giving myself for free, I don't want someone else to commercialise it. But I think it would be different. I don't want to make this more complex than it already is. I know it's very difficult. Even within those licenses, understanding them is difficult. So would it be okay for a commercial entity to use it but not commercialise it? I would be okay with that. But I think the definition isn't okay with that. And I think in some ways the thing is that they could still ask permission. Like it's just... This is the thing about this. It's about permission. The licensing is about permission. But I think if you're within this period of what that person meant when they said non-commercial and you ask their permission, they'll give it to you. I know that's like an extra step. But I think it does make sense in a lot of reasons and in a lot of situations. And the context will differ, so... I'll comment on that as well briefly if I may. Thanks very much. That's a great question. Thank you very much for raising it. And I think time and time again, we have to have these discussions and thoughts about how we licence, what licences we use, what licences we recommend other people to use. And I think it's a really important ongoing process. Most people that I know used a very different kind of open licence and in very, very different ways at the start of their getting to grips with open education than they do further down the journey and those kinds of things change. I always use CC Buy and I recommend that. But I respect the fact that other people have arrived at different decisions for different reasons as well. The important thing, so thank you so much for raising it, is this ongoing conversation and discussion and education. One more question quickly. If anybody's got another quick comment or question, otherwise we will head off to our next session. OK. OK. I'm around. Please come and talk to me. Come and talk to me. Don't think that you can't come and talk to me. I'd love to talk to everybody here when we get a chance. Thank you so much. Let's just show our appreciation one more time. Thank you.