 If we look at 20, 30 years from now, most faculty members and most students will think that open is the norm. Instead of taking a textbook and trying to reverse engineer my outcomes to figure out how they're representing the textbook, I can start from my outcomes and aggregate individual OER around each outcome so that I have exactly what I want, only what I want, not more than what I want, but everything that I want as a faculty member is super empowering. If it doesn't quite fit your course, you can alter it. You can add new things to it. You can take things out. You can take a map and add titles to it or arrows to it. As long as it's licensed to allow remixing and revising, then you can do that and make it fit your course better. It allows students to participate in generating meaningful new content that is viewed by a broader audience than just their professor. Government really needs to have the conversation with presidents across BC, presidents at colleges and universities and institutes about what does open education mean? Why is it important? Why are we taking this into effect? We've already put $2 million into the open textbook project, but that $2 million really is just seeing the advent, the beginning of what is happening in the open education movement. To post things openly or when your students are doing things openly, it really showcases the university. It showcases the work that's happening at the university. It's the time that's the issue for a number of people. And also, I think not everybody knows that there's support available. I think openness is a lot about the humility of understanding that the person on the ground in the classroom with those students knows more about what they need than you did. It's important for faculty and institutions to get on board now so that they are part of this movement and a part of creating it rather than catching up later on.