 There we go. So, Neo, the word is yours, please. Thank you. And thank you in his absence to Igor for kindly inviting us to present this work. I'll start with a series of disclaimers about this exercise in terms of what it actually is, because this is exclusively based obviously on desk research. So, we've had various people follow up with me to try and share more information about things that we might have missed and so on and obviously, there's limitations in terms of language so we've focused because of our linguistic limitations on predominantly resources that are in English. And I'm aware of a lot of other activities that are taking place elsewhere, although we did try through some of what we got to source some of this information as well. And in some places, a little bit of what we put out there was was a bit contentious for reasons that I'll explain shortly but I'm hope I'm hopeful that if it was contentious it was in a constructive way in terms of what we hope this might precipitate over time. So, also just then in terms of where a lot of our focus has been recently. We have been in sort of everyone seems insistent on making up for three years of travel lockdown and so I've already done nine trips this year so far to different parts of the world to begin various processes of engagement. And we have now quite close working partnerships with at least four national governments in Botswana in Tanzania in Zanzibar and in actually a provincial government here in South Africa in my home province of cutting, where we're really focused on trying to give the OER recommendation, beyond policy proclamations. But what we wanted to do in this particular piece of research was to explore national policy commitments, and what we can see as an evidence base of what impact those policy proclamations have had on practices on the ground. And there were various reasons why this is important but obviously one of the critical ones is to see from the perspective of the UNESCO OER recommendations implementation, what role national policies can play in supporting the implementation of more effective OER practices. So I think people are reasonably familiar from, from things that have happened in the past and research that's been done. There's lots of countries that have been working on national policies of various descriptions. And again, please be clear, I'm not talking about institutional policies here. I'm also not talking about state level policies or provincial policies we are talking, we were looking quite explicitly at national policy commitments. There is a kind of conventional wisdom that effective educational policies can be transformative. And the policy then becomes a key indicator of OER practice. The kind of rational logic is that when an OER policy is well designed and implemented, it could act as a driving force for creating and sustaining OER ecosystems. And we're aware of a lot of work being done at the national level on policy development. But, you know, those of us who've been around the block a few times are quite suspicious about statements about whether OER policies actually do act as a driving force for creating real change on the ground. So we wanted to try and see if there was any way to build an evidence base to make the case that OER policies were having that effect. And if they were whether standalone OER policies that were separate from other policy instruments were more effective or less effective than policy commitments that were integrated into mainstream strategies or plans. My hypothesis would have been that the OER policy commitments that are integrated into mainstream policies ought to be more effective because they should be aligned with what the bigger policy priorities of the country are. So what we managed to find was 27 examples of standalone national OER policies and 16 national policies that contained OER commitments. I hope that distinction is clear for people in terms of harm differentiating them. And then unfortunately what we discovered is that it became very difficult for us to be able to assess which of those two particular types of policy were showing greater effectiveness in terms of what OER practices were then happening at the national level as a consequence of those OER policies. Because we sort of set up a criteria, I'm just summarizing it here, the more details contained in the report. So we needed number one evidence that the policy had actually been approved by the government. And that may sound like an odd thing to say, but for example in Mauritius, there's been an OER policy for I think two years, and it was only actually approved last month. So that policy, which a lot, you know, Sanjay from Commonwealth of Learning wrote to me as soon as this report came out and said, you know, but you've missed Mauritius, for example. I said, well, no, we haven't missed it. The problem is it wasn't an approved policy at the time at which we did this research. So we needed to have clear evidence that the policy had actually been approved by government, which meant that, you know, we, there are things we're looking for there. Then we needed availability of some baseline documentation of what OER activities were already underway in the country before the policy came into effect. If we could get that, because obviously what we wanted to see is whether things happening, then the policy is approved, and is there a change in what's happening or is it staying the same. So we were looking for that, but obviously if we didn't find the baseline that wouldn't have been a problem. And then again looking for evidence of meaningful OER practices that had been implemented since the policy was approved. And again, we're focused here on national level activities, so things that were being implemented by ministries of education, and not necessarily by institutions, although we looked at that level as well. And so unfortunately, what we discovered at least online is that in places where policies did exist and had been approved, which was a much smaller subset of the total number of things that we found. We found it very difficult to actually find any concrete evidence of OER practices that were being implemented out of that policy approval. And I was at arms length from this research, so I did not influence it in any way, because if I had, this is exactly what I would have said, we were going to find. So I was very careful to stay completely separate from this and the researcher who helped me with this is living in Canada. So I couldn't even phone her up easily and persuade her about any kinds of things. So when Art did the research herself, we agreed on the methodology and this is what she managed to find. Now, again, as a disclaimer, I will not claim at all that this is representative of the global reality. It's representative of what we managed to find online. And there's always limitations associated with that. So in terms of sort of critical things that we then documented in the in the report. We found very limited evidence of policy implementation that was taking place in line with the policy provisions of either standalone OER policies or other policies that contained OER commitments. So there's been a plethora of activity at the national level, particularly in the developing world where the IDOs, particularly UNESCO and Commonwealth of Learning have been key players here have gone around the world, supporting governments to create OER policies. We're finding it very difficult to see any evidence that that is leading to any real serious changes in practice. So then, because of that, it then became impossible for us to answer our core question, which was, are standalone OER policies more effective than OER policy commitments that are integrated into existing instruments? I mean, my hypothesis would have been that integrated policy commitments are more likely to be more impactful than standalone OER policies because my experience of standalone policies, whether it's in e-learning or OER is that they're easy to write and approve. And then people also easy to ignore. They can come back in five or 10 years time and find that nothing's happened, but when it's integrated into a mainstream national strategy, that's much harder to ignore. So obviously we did find, I don't want to, in saying what I'm saying here, I'm not trying to say that we didn't find any information or any evidence of policies leading on to practice. We don't have to be able to draw any conclusions about what is or isn't more effective. So you'll see there, there were too few policies that fitted our criteria for us to be able to draw meaningful comparison. There's quite a lot of conflicting information online and we've tried to document some of that we can share more information. If you like, I do think, you know, going back to some of what we were talking about about the role of the network of open orgs these might be some things we could think about how to plug some of these information gaps. And then for me what's most important is that there's very limited information that reports on practices that have emerged as a direct result of policy commitments. And I think that this is really where we ought to be focusing our attention, and I'll come back to that as I think about the way forward. And then as I said, it also becomes very difficult then to distinguish between our activities that have been that have taken place as a direct result of a national policy being approved. And those activities that were happening anyway and that are independent of the policies influence, obviously that's much harder to be able to prove one way or the other of course. So, as we look at this. What we kind of can only come to conclusions at this stage is that there's no clear evidence that our policy is a precondition for meaningful our practices which I think we would all have suspected anyway. But it does seem to be a potential enabler still in creating a coordinated national effort geared towards our implementation. So again, when you go into the detail in the report. I'm just summarizing here, we're not I'm not presenting all this information as if it's doom and gloom. And to illustrate is that they're big data gaps and evidence gaps in terms of the connection between these things, which I think we ought to be thinking about as a network and as individual organizations. So then because national strategies which are not the same as policy player role implementation we did probe the relationship between our policy provisions and national strategies or plans to ascertain whether the provisions in the policy in the strategies are aligned with governments broader educational priorities particularly in the developing world is a kind of tendency to have policy documents and then to consolidate everything into a five year strategy. And what you often see is that the five year strategy is as notable for for many of the things that leaves out that are policy commitments, as it is for the things that it contains so there's, you know policies are long wish lists, and in the national strategy consolidates a few of the key policy priorities. At that point, again, you know, commitments to our tend to be very thin on the ground. There are some examples but but often not many. So, so in general, we found the policies that contain our commitments whether they're standalone or otherwise are not necessarily aligning with coordinated national efforts in other government documents these kinds of five year plans and other kinds of again there's a, I think there's a there's a lesson there about actually the importance of making sure that the policy development is very closely aligned with those national strategic planning processes. Because that's really particularly in the developing world that tends to be where the budgetary allocations are focused. And so if things are left out of that, you can have all the policy commitments you like in the world but they don't tend to make much difference. Obviously, the ideal scenario would be that our policy provision should align with government strategic priorities. And these should ideally be consistently expressed in the government's overall vision for the education system and in the documents that it releases and implements. What we thought that this highlighted was the first year need to problematize the idea of educational policy as it relates to the movement and interrogate why our policies are developed, what their function is and how they implemented. If you look for example at UNESCO's Policy Guide Toolkit and there's another similar one that's come out around educational technology policies. I very often get the impression that these are written by people who actually haven't got any experience of policy implementation in government. And so they're these very long and elaborate and complex documents that operate, certainly not in any real world that I'm familiar with in my work with governments. And so I think those are quite problematic. And I think we should be having a longer conversation within the OER movement about what we think the purpose of policy is and what that would mean for what policies ought to look like. If we want, and again I'm talking at the national level of course, if we want them to support the effective propagation of OER practices. So what we're trying to do is to emphasize the importance of that debate taking place. So, as part of that it's really important to think about misalignments between policy provisions and what it's realistic to implement. That's why I'm particularly nervous about standalone policies because they tend to be very idealistic in terms of what they promise. And then that's why they get so easily ignored. The second is allocating resources for policy review processes to determine the validity relevance and progress in achieving policy outcomes. Many of the policies I look at don't even have policy outcomes defined so it, we wouldn't necessarily even be able to to review the success of implementation of the policy because the policy proclamations and statements are too high level and abstract. We also need to be researching and reflecting on policy wins and shortcomings. So, so we hope that what the report we've put together will do is pose a series of questions that together we can hopefully start to find the answers to. But what we wanted to do is to problematize the idea that just going around generating OER policies is in some form indicative of success. We don't think that there's any evidence to sustain that observation. So, if you're interested in seeing the full report, there's the QR code for it. Interestingly, in the government engagements that we're working on at the moment, I think, you know, what's becoming increasingly clear is that there are really very meaningful and concrete ways in which OER and OER is an open licensing can play a very meaningful role in supporting implementation of government policies. So in all in the three countries that I've mentioned that that I've been visiting in the last month or so, or so two months, which is Botswana Tanzania and Zanzibar. All three of them have a very clear and present national need for implementation of activities that are going to have to draw very heavily on OERs. And obviously fortunately, I happen to be at the table so we can make that happen quite easily. But I think that what that highlights is the OER experts really have to embed themselves deeply in the work of governments if they want, what's then developed as OER policies and policy commitments to be able to align with those needs and to start to meet those needs. So that would be the first key observation. The second key observation, and actually this is something we're starting to do at an institutional level with the Botswana Open University and the University of Namibia, is the very often these OER policies, so these are institutional policies, but the same principle would apply at the national level. We developed the policy but we have no metrics for being able to measure the extent to which there's any implementation taking place one year to the next. So we're actually working with both of those institutions to help them put a simple monitoring metric in place to distill from the policy, you know, these are three key metrics that you should be ideally seeking to ship the needle on and let's look each year and see whether or not you're making progress. I don't know whether it will be three or five, I still need to start working on those. And I think definitely at the national policy level, if we could radically simplify the policy commitments and focus on a few key things where successful implementation can actually be tracked as part of a national strategy implementation, we'd have much more success than creating long, elaborate, abstract statements of policy commitment to a whole bunch of different things that people just ignore. You know, so the grandstanding statements about the importance of openness, and about, you know, the importance of government funding being used for being linked with open licensing. And that stuff is nice, but to operationalize it is very complicated. So, what we're finding in the case of these countries is that what's really simple is, they're rolling out a lot of ICT infrastructure into schools. There is a clear and present need for content in specific priority areas. We can package OERs to meet that content need in the very short term with very quick turnaround, we've already started doing that in Zanzibar, and we can have that out and operationalized in schools in a few months. And if we can show that and we can build on that, that's much more effective policy commitment that can be tracked over time than having a 15 page statement about the importance of OER. Those are just sort of, this is all just a work in progress. And I think what I'd be interested in in us maybe continuing as a conversation if people are interested would be what are the ways in which we can start to build this evidence base, more systematically and more coherently around policies that do get approved, and at this point we could move away of course from the national policy focus, we did that because that's the focus of our work and our grant funding. But I think the same principles would apply at an institutional level as I explained with Botswana Open University, is if we develop policies, can we build an evidence base that's tracking whether or not they actually have any impact. And again, the objective of this is not to either affirm or reject policy instruments as a vehicle for change, it's to work out how to use them most effectively. And I think the reality is from what we've seen anyway, the evidence base is just way too thin to be able to make any strong statements one way or the other. And I think if we can work together to build that evidence base and to give guidance and advice about how that evidence base can be constructed and maintained in a manageable way over time. I feel like that would be a very significant contribution. I mean, I have another whole meta level of observation about this which is whether then that all leads to actual meaningful educational transformation, which some of you who've had the misfortune of having to talk to me in more detail will know is a topic that's very dear to my heart and becoming increasingly dear to my heart the more I go back out into the world and just see what a mess education systems really are again in practice. I think that if we if we create a base where we we built, if we can create a methodology where we can build that evidence base. It's then, I think quite easy to start expanding it to say not not only is all these are policies actually leading to effective implementation, but then is the effective implementation leading to transformation of the kind that we would consider to be useful in the modern world, but that would be a sort of second step once we had the evidence base in place. So I've not had to present this before. So, and it all happened very much at the last minute I think someone else pulled out but I was really I'm very grateful for the opportunity to start sharing our ideas. I hope you'll excuse me for the somewhat obscure way in which I'm presenting everything but that that's some of our thoughts up to now. So boring. I don't think we can. We can't hear you. You're on. Sorry, I think I was. Our muted off the way along. Oh, wonderful. Anyway, I was congratulating you and saying there was nothing obscure about a presentation. And then I have many comments to make but I'll pass the word to January first and I'll raise mine. And when the time comes, please. Thank you. New fantastic presentation. Thank you. I, I lower my hand. I really appreciated that and look forward to reading the, the full report. Part of me. Part of me was reacting when you, when you were presenting the findings because I think that there's still. I think there's still a valuable role that some of these more abstract policy instruments can play for people on the ground who need the top cover to do the work that they're already doing. The question isn't about the direct impact that we see the policies affecting an open education but the way that people like us or people at different institutions managing some of the open education change that ideally we want to see seeing if this policy or different localized policies are the tools that they need to help give them the, the kind of go ahead that sometimes holds them back. So it might not be something that yields a very clear yes no this policy was effective it wasn't it immediately had impact or it didn't. Maybe it's a little more convoluted, but still really valuable. I think that'd be even more true with localized policies. Just want to put it out there. Thank you. Maybe I can go next, make a comment. So, you know, so just one thing this the scope of your research was Africa right you didn't go beyond Africa and my right, because you don't mention that, or am I wrong. No, you're wrong. I would, I would say we're certainly skewed towards the developing world, just because that's kind of what we know. And as I said, we're linguistically challenged said that limited our ability to to locate policies and you know I think particularly the area that I'm most aware of where I think the is likely to be action is in South America where I know that is is a lot of action but even there you know if you look at Brazil. There's a lot of things happening there's a lot of state commitments, but, but at the national level again. Policy provisions are limited and mean even a lot of the excellent workers being done in Brazil obviously the policy commitments are somewhat 10 years and obviously influenced by political wins. So, you know, so we tried our best, but but we did not limit ourselves to Africa. And sometimes it's great to hear that I'm going to read your report because I've just opened it in my phone. So, because why am I saying that you're talking about many things that you're talking about resonates with previous studies that I've managed to participate in and one of them was called open a do policies run by the European Commission within the framework of the European Union. And we published that study in 2017, I think I put a link to it, and we were exactly doing a similar type of work we were conducting a research on national policies so speaking to ministers of education of the EU Member States and to the time 28 because the UK was still a new member states. Now we are 27 and but then we went a little bit beyond all we are and we were talking about open education more in more global perspective more in terms of open education practices or our criteria for understanding what would be located as a policy in open education was done against the opening the framework the European framework for open education I think everybody remembers that there was some quite published about six years ago, and we're even talking about maybe it's time to to do that research again to see how much we have advanced from from 2007 to 16 when we're started know, but it's interesting to set just to think that if we are aiming to start building evidence based kind of approach. We could we do have then some parts of the world covered because I have a recent research that are carried out beyond Africa so thanks for clarifying that we have previous work done. I mentioned in back in 2017 that's perhaps time to to do some updating, but there are some convergences in our in our findings, you know, even many years later, which is interesting. When you say that policies are not to be interconnected that something we found as well in that report for Europe. The important of getting more involvement of policymakers know in terms of understanding about open education. And in the strategic planning processes, what we realize is that sometimes policies or we are policies were integrated into national policies for digital education, for example, and sometimes they were completely separate and so and then we do discuss cases studies. So I think it's going to be interesting to use this new source of information that you are presenting more up to date, but also looking into what had been done in Europe before for us to start building this this evidence based database that you're saying because definitely this is in my opinion is an important matter for for more research and more action and it could be one one way for us to something else for us to look at in this in this joint venture of the network of open So just very quickly I was what I just did is a pop this on the screen so that you could just quickly get a sense as to you'll see from the range of countries that we've looked at that it's it's pretty diverse. Again, you know, I claim nothing about the comprehensive nature of this. So if people told us there were gaps in this, I would accept that gladly, you know, we just put this out as a first cut at trying to pull us all together. And the important thing to note here is just that that the existence of a policy that's been approved is not in itself sufficient for for for the country's work to be included in this we need to then be able to see if there's any evidence of actual progression after the policies been approved. And that's the area where we particularly struggled. So coming up with the examples of of policies that have been developed and approved and proclamations and things that that's a walk in the park I mean we were able to do that from a long time demonstrating that that's had any effect in terms of actual practices the hard part. And that's where I think it's going to be interesting also to see what comes out of UNESCO's data set in terms of people reporting on the or recommendation implementation. And so in many respects, this, you know, I've shared this obviously with Zenep as well. This is a kind of precursor methodologically to then being able hopefully to be able to do a much more systematic analysis of the responses of I think 75 or 76 countries have responded now. But again, you know, we have to be very careful here because if the evidence is that we ran capacity building workshops on OER. I'm not putting that down as evidence of effectiveness of implementation that just means you ran some workshops. It's not leading to any, anything, any improvement in educational outcomes for anyone of consequence. I mean, we recorded of course, but you know, that's not for me in anything substantive. And so, so we want to I think over time through this discussion to be able to think about what kinds of evidence of impact we're looking for how we would measure it. And what you know what what would be in and what would be out and obviously that's a debate. I don't have any answers to that question what we're trying to do is to start the debate through this report. Not trying to tell you that we know the answers. Although those of you listen to me now I always think I have an answer to everything but I changed my mind to be five minutes as well so I think that's fair enough. And, yeah, but you know, so we have no idea what would work successfully. But I do think as, as these things build momentum. It's very, very important that we do have evidence of effectiveness because my counterpoint to your I completely agree with you about localized policy instruments. And what I would say though is that there's a kind of risk of, of these large abstract policy proclamations because they also set the culture around the concept. And so I think that badly designed e learning policies from 1520 years ago, we still living with the consequences of those now, in terms of the limited transformational impact that that educational technologies had relative to what we hope it would have, because what those policies enabled is for businesses usual to continue under the guise of transformation. And so I do think there's a risk, and you know, when a thing's been out there and it's been accepted for a long time, that there's all these big commitments and no one actually takes them seriously. Then I think getting the policy commitment running from there becomes very difficult. So, sorry, Julian, I'll shut up now so that you can make more useful inputs than man. Thank you. If you had your hands up or today. First of all, thank you, Neil. I will definitely read the entire report. It just reminded me when you were talking about standalone policies versus, you know, if they're integrated into something larger in the meeting with different members of the Education Coalition last week, they're talking about, you know, what different projects will we partner on globally on digitalization specifically. And it made me question, how are we taking into account the larger policies the policies that aren't directly saying we are bringing technology into a school we are solving a certain issue with technology for instance and so we're bringing in partners at the same time of international whatever. At what point is the four instance open science and open agro, we are recommendation taken into account. And somehow it. It made me ask, then, how are we making sure that when governments are approving projects or starting initiative. It's integrated in that taken into account the other policies. I don't I guess or reflection to what you said I think it makes a lot of sense to see how what could be then what are the national international policies but how are they actually integrated into all the ministries are all application of education. So yeah, I also wondered if there's a difference. It may be so different when it comes to impact on curation versus creation of open education or ours. Somehow, it might it seems easier to push policies and have impact on creation, rather than actually use and schools for instance. I mean, there's lots of complex things that you're talking about in there I mean all of them are very valid I went try and respond to everything. What I was just thinking about is the coincidence of me sitting in some meetings in Dara Salam last week. I discovered really to my absolute horror that the government has distributed 200,000 tablets to every single teacher in the country with no accompanying strategy around what the teachers will actually do with that with those devices. And this is unfortunately more typical than you'd like to have. And likewise, just fortunately gotten there early on this one is a plan to roll out computer laboratories to 1500 secondary schools, likewise with no content strategy in place. And I think that people who live in the rarefied world that unfortunately I don't get to live in. Don't realize that that's actually how the real world functions most of the time. It's just complete chaos and in attitude. And there's a certain degree of coincidence about just having to be in the right place at the right time to be able to shift that discussion, because as soon as I say well, you know, let's start assembling packages of said more of a curation than creation, because again, historically everyone thinks well if we want content we must create it. And that's certainly very much the case in the Tanzanian Institute of Education or in the National Curriculum Department of Ministry of Education in Botswana. And the problem is that they put all this technology out there and they can't justify it to you so we're fortunately happen to be there so well let's start assembling packages of resources based on critical topics in areas of need and get them out into these labs so that they can be used and then everyone says well that's amazing let's do that. Now what we're trying to do is to work out how you can then create policy commitments that actually force the agencies who are accountable for these things to actually then sustain the work. So the initial rollout is completed so that it gets integrated into the agency's job descriptions into the budgets into the way in which they work. That's for me the point at which policies become meaningful. And there's no substitute for that hard slog work. And I do think that part of the problem is that our community has created this false notion in many people's minds that you just go around. We love our colleagues from the Commonwealth of learning and from UNESCO but they go around the world spends three days in a workshop with the government and create a policy and then think that that's the work done. You know, and it's preposterous. So, so what has to be committed to then doing that hard work and working out how those agencies can support that. I will say that my emphasis is very squarely on saying you cannot carry on creating your own content you do not have the capability or the resources to do that. So we need to develop a completely different set of capacities in those organizations that's about project management that's about quality assurance criteria and application. That's about curation of content repositories and learning management systems, a whole skill set that isn't even properly defined, let alone accessible in those agencies. And that's I think where the exciting part of all of this is is is leading us is that it is I think giving us guidance as to what kinds of things we can do that will have an impact. Sorry, again. Yes. Yes, thank you so much, Neil. It was really interesting to listen to this. I mean, it was, I will not. I just have a reflection how important this is what you just was saying, I mean, it is good. We all know that policies are important and very good. And it's not not enough to just have capacity building for teachers, etc. But the real interesting thing in my reflection which you also pointed out is how can this really be those policies what kind of impact does that they really have and how can we monitor and evaluate that I mean there are some kind of timeline and you come to do it immediately you have to have some kind of time in between. I think this is really of interest, because then we can really say that it make a difference with openness and with OER. And as you're saying that now the last seven sentences about how it really have an impact and infrastructure in resources and funding in allocation of everything I mean, that is really the point. So, so how can we how can we go further on with that message which you just gave us. That's the fun next part of the conversation. For me, of course, I think I mean, if you really look at the recommendation, I mean, it is covered in those five areas. If you put it there, put them together and see the ecosystem because it is about an ecosystem. That's so important so thank you so much. Now I think building on what it was said and then also some nails points. I'm probably a broken record here, but it seems like maybe what we, we as a community could do to to have an effective intervention would be showing the, like, policy folks how their work is already maybe, or could support already existing effective interventions in related areas. So what I'm, what I'm trying to say is, if there's a way that we could go back to UNESCO counterparts and say, if you are willing to, like, invest in this and work on this. We can take credit for these other areas that are already underway and that have, you know, have significant impact in in these different fields so I'm looking at the open government partnership local options, where local governments work with their citizens to define the different commitments that they they want to realize over the course of one to five years. And wouldn't it be great if we could, we could show them, hey, these are your commitments to open education actually fuel your commitments to, you know, open fiscal reform or science or open data or other areas that they're already working on that would ideally incentivize policymakers and also give us kind of a. And in for maybe some interventions to get some of the hard work that I think you called it the tough slog underway rather than just kind of leaving it at the abstract level. Anyway, I think I've said that before in probably different more convoluted terms but I'll post the link in the chat. Thank you. Thank you very much. I think we are coming to, to the end of our meeting I don't know if they all like to give some final words or anybody else. But it has been fantastic and definitely let's, let's think of ways of taking this work forward I think definitely something. So, I mean, I'll just repeat my gratitude for you all taking the time to listen to, to me talking which always surprises me. And yeah, and I'm glad also to hear that that what it does is to stimulate that process of posing questions that we need to find answers to. We certainly didn't think that we had found answers, but we did want to, to really to show shine a light on the fact that I think, you know, ever you said, we all know that policies are important. And I think that that truism is not true. I think policies are actually most often quite destructive in terms of their impact, because they set up commitments that are not attainable in practice. And I think this year down pathways that I think have the opposite of the intended effect. But I think I do think coming out of this, and I hope we can continue this discussion and I can share more ideas and get some inputs from, from this whole network is I think they are also ways in which we need to be able to be able to to have much more answers to things. So just to Julia and your, your point there. I don't think we can stop the political rollout you know when a politician's decided he wants to give his teacher union 200,000 laptops, good luck getting in the way of that. What we do need to be able to do is to turn around the content solution that gets driven with that fast enough to be able to run in pair in time with that. So to look at the packaging of educational resources for for students, for example, it's such a fragmented landscape. Mathematics science, you have to look all over the place to pull the content together. Then you're looking for platforms where you say well, so every single instance that I'm working on, you have to have an offline synchronizable version of the content repositories for implementation to work successfully because the school's internet access is not sufficient to be connected online. And, you know, we're exploring various options looking at Calibri looking at what Moodle does look at all the etc etc. But the truth is that these are not black box installations by any stretch of the imagination and that's what they have to be. You know if I'm going to put an installation in 1500 computer laboratories which I have to do in the next four months. I can't be putting something in place that's like a Raspberry Pi. He's Robinson assembly affair that's going to break down every five minutes and requires someone with technical skills of a PhD to work out how to assemble it. And because they did it once in one school in rural Zambia and they said it was a success. Sorry, that's not true. It's only successful if you can put it in 1500 schools and it works successfully and seamlessly for two years without requiring maintenance. That's the definition of that technological success and our content repositories need that technological architecture. So I'm going to share lots more of those kinds of things as we go through our journey, and maybe this community can. We can start mobilizing resources to help to find some of these solutions so that, as you say Julianne, we can join them rather than trying to tell them they're wrong, but help them to make progress out of what they're doing that was stupidly conceptualized in the beginning. And then everyone's a winner, which is what we're aiming for. Yeah. Thank you, Neil. Thank you very much. Very long. No, fantastic. Thank you very much. You know, just just one thing that is said I think policies are destructive. I think you said something like that. It really made me think, because from the experience we have at least in Europe which is exactly the other side of the coin of working on the developing world, you know, that you said quite a lot of the policies that we had implemented had very good results, long term results. So maybe this, this is something that we could look into more closely, you know, contextually based on what it means to have policies and in fact one of the conversations in Europe is that we need more because normally policies in Europe come alongside money for implementation for countries so and so forth, you know, so maybe these are nuances that we could look into in terms of different contexts. Right. So this is this is just a coin there. A scent that we say no my scent on this, but thank you again very much. We will distribute these and this recording. And it's been fantastic. It's just the beginning of the conversation. So thanks Neil and thanks to everyone who joined. Just to say that our next meeting is on the second of May, second of May, and Nicole said from week media said she would join us to do presentation we the topic is to be decided. But if you'd like to do a present to make a presentation as though please feel free to sign up. Towards the end of our agenda there is there a listing which you can put your names and pick your date, and that would be brilliant. So thank you very much, and see you again next month hopefully, all the best. Thank you. Bye bye everyone. Bye bye. Bye bye. Bye.