 I have one question below. This is a bit of an overview of where I'm up to in the audience. Particularly from the institutional policies and how they are traveling in educational I didn't see what you were talking about. I might just leave it up so I can find something on there. So my study is about what are the values that we as drive to openness in an educational group through different kinds of policies. And this really includes thinking about policy and what I've said. So not necessarily just thinking about institutions that have an over-education policy or have an OER policy, but so much as one of the policies that you have, one of the two in the stroke education space. That makes it look at policy texts, so actual written policies as they exist. Research and community perspectives, which is what I've been doing through the survey, which I had launched the previous OER 72, since a year ago. So it's great to be back here to report back this year. And then the next stage through the video is the patient community. And some of the research questions that I'm considering are about the relationship between the policies and practices, and that's sort of through all the different strands. Thinking about what the key drivers of policies are according to policy makers and stakeholders, that's partly through the survey. And also one of the characteristics and similarities of these policies and these policy drivers or trends being faltered or accelerated in the context of that. It's obviously the pandemic that came along as a big interrupter of my research, and stopped me from actually doing it quite a while. And then that got me thinking about how I'll really be researching anything in this higher education context with that going on and not good knowledge that's going on. That's changing a lot of stuff. It's having an impact on what is to do that. So thinking about policy levels, you have a supranational level. We have organizations that make their decorations for the foundations. UNESCO most famously, encouraging member states to think about these things in certain ways to take certain kind of actions. In the government level, they're able to make legislation and make available funding for super-prison. About policy initiatives like OER, for example. And then the institutional level. There's so many different things that we consider actually to be making up the policy of the institution, but a policy landscape. So there are strategies. Things that are actually officially called policies. There are manuals, guidelines, there's advice, there's funding that's put towards certain kinds of initiatives. As far as I can turn that, that's policy decision. Even if it's not written or a document, it's sponsored. It's also when you have any organization of people who actually know about certain kinds of practices, people who can support you with different things. The decision to employ people like that, again, is a policy decision in the same way as funding a project. And also providing the infrastructure that makes some practices possible and others, others maybe are not possible with that infrastructure. Just think about the classic kind of online learning environments that we have in institutions. Normally, it's not very good at enabling both education practices. Normally, it's all kind of blogging and you've got your courses that you're studying and no access to anything that you're not personally studying. And that kind of thing. And certainly, the external to organization is a sort of old garden or whatever. And also, I started thinking about policies as also being just kind of the way that we do these courses in action. So basically, policy is kind of enough to get you to practice some other extent. Generally, because I would actually use this phrase, what is action, what are her hesitations that I thought the intersection might be describing, what could only be a form of policy. But thanks for saying something like ignore our policies. That's just the things we've done. So as you can see, quite an extensive concept of policy. It makes the space interesting to think about, but also complain. So we're going to talk a bit about these different types of policy. And of course, I think about what policies are doing. Maybe labeling, constraining, recognizing, legitimizing. All of these types of practices. So again, I'm not focused only on OER, but also on online courses, maybe ventures that you might now be able to get by doing what we're formerly seen as just an affiliate. Of course, it's network participation, learning communities, student knowledge production, and sharing crowdsourced collaborative knowledge production. For example, the weekly verse. And also thinking about the culture openness in institutions, and how it manifests. And so for the second strand, but it's not looking at policies and not yet interviewing the policymakers, but surveying open, essentially open practitioners, people who may or may not regard themselves as that, but who are at least interested in actual answer a survey about it. Then I've done the survey. And my aim really was to reach people that have an interest and a knowledge about what feel that they felt they have a knowledge of what's going on in their institution. So this is kind of purposeive sampling. It's not supposed to be seen as a representative sample because out which you possibly have a representative sample. So in that sense, if I want to, you know, a representative sample is normally what you would want when you were doing some kind of polling, you're trying to find out what's public opinion. But this was more about the opinion of this kind of action group really taking an interest in each other. And so through this, I'm hoping to point to trends that illuminate areas that you know less about. And in the survey, I've been asking questions across a range of areas about the practice that I have shared on the previous slide. And so it's asking about the different areas, the methods of supporting them, and participants who asked to rate the level of support that their institution provides, and those different kinds of practices. And then also asked to elaborate and explain, at least, or just tell me to tell you more, in three text boxes, and in the relationship area of practice. And so this generated a huge amount of attention. I'll tell you very much about it today. I was really pleased with the amount of responses that I got, which was two hundred and two. And majority female, but good. And wide range of roles, but mostly academic teaching and or teaching research or, you know, academic roles. But quite a few from education development, design, and technologies. And this was an international survey that was spoken to 12. Obviously, there are going to be limitations in who would actually answer a survey that's in the first place in English. And that is going out to people that I am able to reach from my position of, you know, I'm a PhD student. I don't have any kind of magical way of putting the survey in front of people that don't know me and don't have any kind of ties, some really big way to. So it was challenging to get the survey out. And I'm really pleased with the, through the various kinds of tactics that I tried, including social media, email, presenting various kinds of events, things like that. And also contacting some people in the field directly and then please tell me to answer my survey. Because then I was able to get responses from quite a wide range of countries. Interestingly, the biggest responding country, Canada. But as a large number of responses, it's probably off of the beast. But yeah, so the most response from Canada, quite a lot from the UK. South Africa and quite a few countries had a few responses in Brazil. And then most of the other countries were like one response from a country. So, you know, I mean, my response from Canada. I also asked people about what was their experience of education, just to see if my anticipation of the clients and people who'd be interested in answering the survey was accurate. And so there were people who described themselves as an experienced practitioner and a visible advocate for like the biggest group. And then, you know, people who said I'm an experienced practitioner advocate with a role in developing policy, there's also a group that's 40 people at 73 who didn't feel that they had a role in policy. And 43 people who said I am a fifth practitioner and 45 said I just more recently started learning about it. So that was kind of kind of what I was expecting was to see that. So the next bit I'm going to talk about some findings that I found out in the section of the survey that was about how we are. And what I asked was this. So the use of creation, sharing and adaptation of international resources, for example, the textbooks at your institution, that I asked them across these different areas. Is it discussed in one or more specific policies? Is it supported by funding for initiatives of projects? Is it supported through infrastructure? Is it supported by staff members with relevant expertise? And is it supported by forms of recognition or reward for participants? And I asked the same, basically the same set of questions for the other forms of practice as well. And what I found was that what we are is discussed in written policies on the scale. The scale was from quite unsupported through to highly supported. So these respondents felt it was highly supported in a reasonably good number of cases. Sort of nearly 40, although completely unsupported in slightly more than 40. And then a range in between. So there's actually a possibility that there's kind of actually more written policy out there than I would necessarily have. And I asked them if it's supported by funding for initiatives of projects. It was by far the biggest response was unsupported. But when you look at the adding together the somewhat and highly that there was definitely there's some of that. In terms of staff members with relevant expertise, I was kind of pleased to say that the highly supported came out strongly and somewhat supported as well. So that was part of the people who seem to know that there are people in their organization that know about this. Obviously not in all cases. So in terms of whether we are supported by infrastructure, platforms or tools. This is our one was to be something that unsupported by this highly supported. So here we have really a mix puzzle, but the old levels. What he says was that it's not like radically out in front of. And here I thought I wasn't surprised and I was. Pointed a bit, I guess, in terms of whether it's supported by forms of recognition or work. So absolutely unsupported. So all of those numbers are like sort of interesting, but what does it mean? I think we can get a lot more of a flavor of what it means by reading some of the text comments from this piece. This topic about how we are having a lot and some of the comments were really good. So we have creation adaptation grants. We have a dedicated policy and service and play stuff. It's explicitly in our strategic plan program tools staff member. We recognize people who are doing this on our website. We have an library now. There's a written policy that advocates for use where we are. There were a couple of like encouraging messages. That was not by no means all of the response for like this. And I don't want to call these the bad, but they were definitely not so. So we have a library based initiative. It's fully funded and I will promote it. I was well supported by the library, but through informal channels, I was not supported by my team. The OER will do nothing for my profile. The library is actually engaged with the wider institution. It's not, that was not an unusual, there were various comments that were put along this type of line. Positive policy, Senate statements, but very literally real progress. I'm an adjunct. I have no idea if this institution cares about OER. It isn't worth much trying to figure it out so long as no one tries to stop me. So, you know, I mean, it's not sounding like someone is feeling empowered by their institution. And then, you know, it got out of there. So I don't think that you know what OER is other than it's free. If so, why don't you want to share things free? We've had projects in some of these are permanent parts, but open as an ideal was officially spoken against. There was a role in the library which supported open practice, but funding disappeared. Open as supporting office size of a very few people's desks and by some faculty working in isolation. Was that really interesting? That's fine. So there's some practice, but senior management are uninterested, disengaged and not informed. And OER seems to be entirely anathema to the workings of the university. So, you know, the free text comments were really bringing people's views to life. I also asked them what's going on with copyright in your institution. And so, this was really useful to run the survey by the GoJN group of pilots. And thanks to Kathy, actually she pointed out that I had not included a useful option in this question, which I don't have. So I was thinking the institution owns the copyright, the institution generally owns the copyright, but they exempt research, seems to be another model. Or, in point zone, they were in copyright. And then, as I said, it can also depend on what type of role you have. So if you're an academic, maybe you're not an academic or a staff, as they tend to say. Non-academic staff, professional services, faculty problems, and you have the institution owns the copyright. And of course, I also thought this might well be unclear or unknown, which many people had it was. So, untheory or unknown was 20%. The copyright ownership depends on the type of role that I hadn't even thought to ask. It actually came out about 16%. It's always owned the copyright in their own works for whatever purposes it's produced, about 23%. Institution generally owns everything, but research exempts it about 20%. Institution owns all everything, about 21%. So it's quite a big mix. So we can see that quite often when we advocate for the kinds of practices that we might wish to advocate for in this space, it's not actually obvious what position people are in in terms of whether they even own their own material. And I think also it's not obvious whether the institution owns the material, what they want you to do with it, or don't want you to do with it either. Right, so maybe you don't know if they own it or you don't know. And then B, you don't know what they're okay with or what they're not. And so I asked them, so ownership status aside, how do you think that the institution feels? Are you encouraged to consider licensing and releasing these as though we are about 38% said yes, neither encourage nor discourage about 56% and we are discouraged from releasing these. Tomorrow, I think that at least sometimes. So another thing that I thought would be interesting to mention for this session was about pandemic effects. And Brina who is here with me knows that I was very interested in what was going on during the pandemic around the ballooning cost of library resources. And in the UK, there's been a really prominent campaign, there's evil SOS around this. And they continue to be an active community that's sort of arguing against the exorbitant costs of. The textbooks, which basically were the costs were normally grabbed up during the pandemic and institutions like where I work ended up investing. I'm unanticipated. I'm planning millions of extra pounds into library resources in order to support students. And that's that's lacking up to the end. So, and then rain and I also wrote an article about our experiences. Digital education support people in the context of the pandemic and how a lot of people were saying now is the time for openness. But was it was it really happening a lot? And so that's. Anyway, so what did I find from the survey, which which I asked, you know, what was being the impact in terms of education policy or practice. Very nice. Not sure very much difference. Our institutional response was much more tool focused. We've been a little awkward about the tension where we are. I don't believe it's impact of quality, but then definitely increased awareness of open resources and practices. Positive shift was OEP not policy as such with the teaching and learning community overall. This was essentially what I wrote about that people have opened up to the idea of actually discussing teaching when they teach. Why do they do the things that they do in a way that they were not doing? That was definitely an increase in open practice, even if people were not so increasing their adoption or adoption of resources. And an interest in OER was a byproduct of the difficulties of providing access to the commercial education materials. So I think, you know, there's maybe that's a slow burn. Because I think this thing of shifting gears as an institution and saying, okay, we're going to start varying OER knowing how this is happening at my institution as well. It's quite a long process to sort of get those into production. Seeing that. So, but so some sense that there is some. So, um, so I'm not going to talk about all of the other stuff that I've asked about in the survey. There was loads more questions and loads more responses. And again, you know, really from the heart kind of fascinating pretext comments, which is going to still be a somewhat of a pleasure to analyze. But it's, it's proving to be, you know, quite interesting starting that reporting more out. So next, I'll continue my analysis of the survey data. I'll group and interview policy makers. I will analyze the interviews a little together and then I'll just write the book. And so thanks very much for listening to this. Thanks. Thanks. Um, it's been great. Um, and it's essentially almost five minutes. So no questions for real. I'm starting those questions first. Was there anything in the five minutes? As you most. And what was that? That's really a really good question. I think actually what surprised me at first, because I was kind of reading all the responses as they came in. I was kind of checking daily, like do I have any more and like reading through all the all the pretext comments. And the thing that was the most surprising to me was that it wasn't very surprising. I felt like, this is kind of what I would think about, you know, it seems that kind of the kind of stuff that people tell me. The kind of stuff that I hear from people or, you know, we'll talk about conferences like this. And so then I started to worry like, maybe this is a really bad research design. I'm not learning anything. And um, but, um, but then I think we reassured me that actually it's probably just because I'm so obsessed with this that it's like, I'm kind of the worst. It's not. Yeah. I just wanted to say. Well, thank you Leo. Thank you for sharing. There is other things that are very interesting. And I think how we share, like, there was a, like how open education is supported or not supported and by whom institutions are going to be resonates, especially the quality statements I can see from the audience. So I think people can identify with what you're sharing here, which is doing good. Perhaps like, I'm interested in the next steps, like, because you're planning to interview policy makers within different institutions. Are you drawing from the sample of those institutions that you surveyed, or is this going to be another group of institutional leaders? Because I'm also actually thinking, and I know that it's not part of your objective necessarily, but actually this would turn out to be quite a useful advocacy towards someone in time. In terms of how people and practitioners in institutions are responding to these sorts of questions and what the issues are, what the problems are, for example, and it could be used as an advocacy to some ways towards institutional leaders. You do something about it. Yeah, I think so. I mean, I kind of hope that in the end I'll be able to not only tell the story of what's happening or what does the landscape look like, but also be able to highlight some things that I think are actually working well. And I've seen some success stories out there that other institutions will be interested in emulating or adapting. And so for in terms of interviewing the policy makers, I think that it's going to be tricky because obviously I've got to track down who's actually going to be interviewed. But I definitely will want to try and, although again, as I said, even with the survey itself, it's not really meant to be representative. It's not important to me that I would interview people less. But I do want to have as wide a range of possibilities. I'm going to be thinking about a range of different countries and regions of the world and, you know, kind of resource rich and resource for types of environments and all of that kind of thing. So, so, so I think that, you know, that will be my main goal will be just to try and get those two. And not so much that, you know, I think that the what I will define as being a policy maker will be reasonably flexible because I also think policy is made in quite a different place depending on where you are. And so someone might be in a position of, you know, in a very senior position, I say, well, I wrote the policy and people agreed and then it's done. And in some cases might have been much more thought about and I'd be really fascinated to hear about that. What's one question that you asked? We've got probably minutes, maybe do you want to have a question and answer while we set up? Yeah, that's a good question. Just sort of, I'm sort of aware of like there's so much going on in this panel. It's almost like filter, you're almost going to click the end of the screen and be seeing everyone and saying, yeah, come on, let me get this data and we'll go about that something. I just wonder whether the future you signed for presently almost imposing a bit more for onto the cables. And I sort of get why I don't want to do that and I don't want it to be too reductive and sort of letting it speak for itself. My worry is that, like, it'd be really hard to manage this and you're probably already thinking about this quite a lot. And there are only sort of like frameworks or stuff that you've been looking at that we've seen sort of like analytics tools to start just sort of putting things in boxes, even if that's not really what you want to do just for the sake of, you know, actually completing the bullet and just sort of relating to that. You know, I know there's the old bit of common policy registrar, which I'm not really sure what's happened to that. Have you got any plans to kind of share this data as a database with the teams, maybe as Igor said, applicants and people interested in policies, that would be really super such a big detailed data set. Again, if we require that in position of scheme. I do some work with the policy registry people while it was while it was still operational. And actually one of the aspects of the work we were doing was kind of working on the kind of schema and the way of looking at kind of different types of policy. I want to be addressing and sort of what sort of type of, you know, whether it's policy or some other kind of instrument that acts in a policy kind of way. And now you know what these things were we're trying to work with effects that we're trying to have. So there is some some work that we've done in terms of kind of classifying policies. And I definitely will will kind of go back to that and the policy registry data is actually all online. No, no, we really decided itself. But yeah, I will definitely. We're trying to go those kind of schema and frameworks there now and figure out how this maps on to theuber people transfer. Wait, wait, wait, wait, it's just going to say Following up on what Igor was saying that she wanted to present to me was one of those companies. I was benchmarking my institution against the others. This would be very interesting to share with my institution. We're in part of the 20% here. We're in the 50% there, but because I feel like we're going to have a learning voice, some actually see ourselves in that doubt against other institutions. We think might not. It could be. I don't know. I'm worried that also it could make institutions that are not doing a very good job going, well look, we're normal. But no, I think it's definitely going to be value with releasing results and trying to get all that that people can use to make a sense of this. Well, he's thinking inch by inch. So, no, this is a funny story. When I looked at the schedules, I thought, oh, I'm opposite Neo. I'm literally in the past like that anywhere though. And then I hear yesterday during dinner, no, I'm following Leo or might be able to. So, what's that called if I am happy as a lawyer, and it's E, S, M, I, L, L, E, R. And I'm the coordinator of open for face faith at Oklahoma State University. They are dropped into Twitter and the discord if you want just to jot it off and they are not really like, so it's not missing a whole lot. But so that's my gig at Oklahoma State University. I'm also, oh, we are library, but I run the open publishing got open access to the spot outside of the house. And we've intentionally separated them for a number of reasons. That's, so that's right. So I'm smack down middle United States, smack down middle of Oklahoma, all the way over here across the pond. You may have noticed a lot of people here from Oklahoma. And the reason is I love this community. I found this group. I 2018 Jennifer Edwards up with me to fit my tech and from them and tech by my way to G o G in and from G o G and found my way to this conference and love the conversations that you know, I have never here. And I wish I love that our conversations in the States, like you're shifting more that direction. And so I just scoop up everybody I possibly can and bring them to this to this conference. So Oklahoma is not trying to take over Scotland, but we are really liking it here. So maybe, but the topic of my presentation when we call it up, it's just not looking at the screen. You have to hear. Oh, are you okay with that? Yeah. No, I'm 53. It's not my birthday. My birthday last year. Okay. So, but my topic today is the eye poem and it's analyzing qualitative data. And I will confess that the expert in this is actually Dr. Bridget. She's my grad student. We've been working with this on a grant thing. Of course, I want to scoop her up and get her over to you. Also, I the way she describes this methodology and this method of data analysis is so wonderful and and gives us something more to do with the qualitative data, right? And just publish it and tell a story or whatever. And she got a job at Oxford University three weeks ago. So, okay. Also, I don't know what I'm talking about. So this is what it is. So I'm going to read from my well written notes to give you a good idea of it. The references in there will really, we have like, okay. So, these are the key pieces that have informed this work. So I'm going to say her name wrong. So if somebody thinks it's, let's go on and listen. Somebody say, right? Oceane Nielsen. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, that part. I think that's right. But identified use of open educational resources as a game changer for novelty lifelong learning human rights and social justice. That's on page. Show you that piece between Esco. Now I'm nervous. Recommendation. Right? Oh, that's it. The UNESCO recommendation. I get the recommendation except for the other one and I got called on us. The UNESCO recommendation. I'm trying to talk about the 2019 for the use of OER solves for the enactment of significant research. So one of the conversations over the United States being amplified by certain voices is that the research that's being done in areas of open doesn't necessarily have the rigor that some feel like it should have in order to be federal. And I think in this article by Eva, she brings that into play that calls for an act of significant research. So we need to be stepping into that space and we need to be doing research that's considered credible. Outside of our particular discipline. So in librarianship and fine arts, I also need though to be able to construct a study and an act that now lies in several results in a way that my chemistry friends are going to buy into. So you have to be able to speak a lot of different languages. To inform and assess implementation of OER and related practices, selecting effective methods for use in exploring areas of interest is a key part of high quality research and you'll find that in one of the GOGM pieces that was recently published. I talked too fast and I've got a four and eight accent. So give me a wave if you're starting. Okay, the presentation author so for Bridget and me are part of open lifelong learning. And that's a team which has received funding from the Institute of Museum and Library Services to develop a replicable replicable research methodology for use in contexts with little research such as small rural institutions, community colleges, or for use by faculty and instructors with limited time or research expertise. And this came out of I think it was a 2019 article by John Hilton that invited us all to do a better job of designing rigorous studies. And in the library community we talked about and I said, hey, I was finished at my PhD. I was like, how many hours of methodology research courses do you take with librarianship? Because over there is a lot of the librarians who are doing the research. And they're like, oh, okay. Yeah. So we need to, because they're busy learning a lot of other things, information science, that their terminal degree is, it's amazing. But so that's our goal is to build out a replicable rigorous plugin to research another dollar, right? So it's, we created a survey and the idea is we'll have a little blurb that says, hey, here's how to build your literature review. Here's a couple key places to start from. Make sure you know, see what's happening right now. This is how to collect the data. This is how to plug it into SPSS, sorry. And then here's kind of a way to share finding. So maybe we can get some replicable results and really see some trends emerge that are designed in a way that cross disciplinary scholars will be able to buy it. Okay. So I love the script for that long thing. Okay. Help me if this is going to say it again. The research methodology and the design aims to measure the impact of OER use on development of lifelong learning skills. So we're stepping away from DFW rates and grades and see if we can some of those soft skills or play skills, critical thinking. And we'll include methods and instruments for the collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data. So while quantitative data collection and analysis methods will provide means to assess impact, the team also want to provide an avenue through which qualitative data can be used to help explore the ways in which participants made meaning of their experience. The purpose of this presentation is to describe the construction of research poetry, including iPhones used within the project as an analytical method for qualitative data. And now here's where we definitely step into Bridget's area of expertise. So I'll read what she shared with us. So construction of iPhones, it's the letter I, I poems as a method for data analysis is one element of the listening guide. So it's capital L capital G, qualitative relational voice center feminist methodology. And citation for that is Woodcock 2016, who really does an endeavor, but it can be used to analyze intermedia transcripts. The use of poetry as an analytical tool can help distill sometimes and really qualitative data, as you just heard from, down to their bare essence. Constructing qualitative data into I poems can surface voices conventional research methodologies may silence according to Woodcock, helping capture counterpoint, harmony, and distance. And that's a description by Gilligan in the 2015 in the story. The I poems can also reveal the emotional reverberations and other ineffable components of the qualitative data. So that's of a high bar, right? When I she was first telling me about this, I'm like, that's, that's a lot. But then when you see her work, it's just amazing in her sheet. So the listening guide emphasizes attending to the first person voice of the I, and it's associated stream and listening for the different voices that speak to the researcher's question and tracking the interplay or counterpoint. One of the methods included in this methodology is a construction of I poems. So the overall listening guy is the methodology. The I poem is one of the methods within it. It gives voice to people silenced within conventional research methodologies. And basically it involves at least two of the transcripts, you know, two of the reporting. And I think for Bridget, I think she went ahead and created her transcript and followed all of the transcript along as she listened to it, but it wasn't just a read. She really did, she listened all the time to it as well. So on the first listen, you're just listening for the plot. So like your whole laundry or going through your walk or whatever, you're just listening and seeing what catches your attention. On the second listen, that's where you listen for the I. You listen for each instance. It was the narrator, the person themselves using the first person pronouning I, and she also kind of expanded it to me as she did her work. And then you return to the transcripts from the first listening and you mark and select the groups of I statements that stood out as particularly meaningful or intriguing. So I feel like her second listen has a couple listens. Like when she talks about it, like there's the first one where you catch the eyes and then maybe another one where you go through and sanitize really stood out. According to Gilligan and Eddie, there are two rules during the stage analysis highlight every I phrase within a given passage for these phrases in the order of their appearance in the past. So she had another document over here. First one over here. She highlighted all the I phrases and they may say, but it's like the I plus the verb. And then she would pull those out and put them in the order of appearance on the document on the space between them. And the I phrase includes both the pronoun I and the test verb. Researchers can at their discretion also include any relevant surrounding words. But the way Bridget enacted it, her first time she really just did the I plus the verb. And then once you had, I think it was like when she went back to the synthesis stage, she may be pulled some of the contextual stuff around it, but she really wanted to sit with just the I and the verb and save the work to see what the story was. Then they craft poems for the statements, rewriting the I statements as stances, which are tuned to the voice of the other specifically to the I with the first person voice as it speaks of acting and being in the world. The I poems give us a seat and revealing summary of the narrative words. And then in the final stage, the researcher synthesizes and they communicate with they, the researcher has learned about the narrator and their research question. So that really, that sounds like you're expecting a lot out of qualitative data with a really fuzzy method, right? But when she went through it and like as you see how she's described it, if you really follow each of those steps and you document it, you've got as you've got a nice, clear, someone else can follow it along and know exactly what you did, right? Then you've got that rich descriptive data so they can step in and kind of see what see what you're doing. So it's similar to a magic analysis, but structured differently. And I think has, so if you're going to go write it up, you've got nice, clear steps, right? How many of us have gotten into the university and been like, wait, how do I describe, I describe the magic analysis. I lived with my data for a year and a half. And then I wrote the story. I just need you to believe it because I am so sick of this. So I feel like this is a good way. And she uses it to conference. She's got some quantitative work to go along with it. And that's what we're using. You've got the font stuff and then also the qualities. So what I wanted to invite you to do was give this a go. And before I put the next slide though, I'll tell you why I actually want you to try it. It's not just in case Leo finished on time. When I was playing with this, I was at a conference, a tech conference in Oklahoma, and they handed out copies of our constitution. Maybe I'm not some government document, you know, and I think I was kind of bored of the session and they also give me scissors. I don't even know why I should see that. But I thought, Hey, I'm going to make iPhone out of the Constitution. And so I went through and I cut the I verb, I verb, I verb out of the Constitution and glued them on my little piece of paper and ended up with something so beautiful and insightful. Also, well, it's like, well, I see a lot of reasons for struggling with some things that we are right now in the United States, because I put the Constitution in iPhones, but it really, it told me a different story about the Constitution than when I would just sit and read it. So that's why I encourage you to take a break. We can use some of our data cap and have it handy. This is also an opportunity for me to be open with the data from my dissertation. Should be de-identified, but also it's Emily Venture, case date, and she's okay with the right membership. As you can scan that if you want. If you're online, you're welcome to click into the Discord, but I really would like for us to take about three minutes and give it a go. And I'm sorry to join with boring information. I was going to do it with some of our student data that was being emotional and stuff like that. But I just think we're all really tired. And so I didn't really want to give you any feelings. So here's my, here's some of the dull dissertation data I had. Take three minutes and play with that or your own data and see what you can build. Maybe we'll do two minutes. I'm going to set my clock two minutes so we don't just stop because I got, I'll just step the way, I can't remember the difference. Online if you step the way for a second to hold laundry, or do your feet on the rack away, we're clicking into that link to play with this data and build a little bit of an iPhone to see if it tells a different story than you might get if you were just. Okay. You can or just get a console or just think you have it in your heart. Yeah, yeah, it's, that's, it should be open. I don't know if you can edit it or not. I think I imagine pen and paper, but however you like. And this is just for you. This is it. I'm not going to like share this out and say, look what we did. She's one more minute. She's in a team. So you can keep team green with it if you want, but just in that grief, not enough time. What did you notice anything seen out to you about that experience about kind of playing with that a little bit fun and fun? Yeah. Anything else? We'll go with that. That's okay. Yeah. Yeah. And you see it once you take all those statements out and you lay them all out to me. I was struck by how much Richard the story became once I just looked at the eye and all the different firms. And this is just actually it was just a conversation about their open access and open education publishing program at the university. So it's not even we weren't even saying how do you feel? How are you? But it was some of their non-similar sides were interesting to capture as well. And I was originally going to use the UNESCO piece and have us play with that, but there aren't any eyes. But it might be interesting what I think would be cool to do was in some of these annotation of the projects they have, go back and capture those comments and see what kind of iphone you can make out of those. So all right, now that you've played with it, exactly not enough to know anything about it. It's on screen I want, but this is thank you very much to these two sponsors, though you can't see that. So Chia-Chien, Michael, us and local, I was sort of way to the phone. Okay, so she I didn't want to share with you before because I didn't want to break your ability to build your own stuff. So one list, I'm going to show you the list of sharing through the list of I was, I was, I was, I had, I went, I said, and then she went back and contextualized it and this was the phone. I was so angry. I was angry at her and I was angry at Crystal because I had talked to Crystal about stuff like this. I went in and turned on the light. I said, get out of bed and go by strawberries. Yeah, she won't be eating my strawberries again. So when you just read that poem, you hear a very good story of a, frankly, Cathy S. Moore in her house, telling the story of the strawberries. But just the fact that she pulled out the I and then in the verb and just sat with those for a little bit and then decided what to contextualize helped her. So it's a story of middle-aged women in the pandemic, right? And it becomes more than just a story about strawberries. It's just that I was, I was, I was, I have, you know, and just that. So those, those feelings makes it, it makes it a little short. Okay, so these are the organizations that have helped support this particular project. Thank you. And if you haven't found your way to GIGN, give you the pitch and bring them on board. Here is the attribution statement, the key little pigments are Brian Nathers and this is my link you here. Thank you. There's my email, two S's, two L's, all sorts of unnecessary consonants, and it does not start with an S, right? And I'm at, Cathy S went on the board up and I'm hoping it's insane. I have a mask on. I just, until after this conference is when I'll be able to start with that. So, what questions do you have for me to pass on? Something completely distracting. One word explaining and I was wondering why, because if you're familiar with corpus, the system does that for you in five minutes and it's all concordances. You create a corpus of whatever document policy or what you have. You said, okay, find all the I need then you define for a system to find all the words. And then you can define how many more words after I with what part of speech actually you want to find. So, in the middle of your presentation, I just stopped and I'm trying to figure out what this method can do that a corpus cannot do. And I was thinking you must be a human but I didn't find any difference. And I was wondering why did you choose a corpus analysis? Right. And I bet I'm gonna say, I don't know, right? Like we were talking. My guess, so this, I'm not familiar enough with this methodology and this method to speak for it. And so go to the, go to the article that's cited in there and read about it. But yeah, I would guess that it's the human aspect of it, the difference between what she describes her work and how much she listened and listened and listened and listened to the transfers to just live with it. I would think that might be the difference. Is it she she held hands with her participants and listened to him as she's going on walks. And as she built this, whereas maybe with the corpus, we don't have that it's maybe a different opportunity to come alongside them. But I don't know. So I'm also not familiar with that. They seem to be the same on the computer. She might be a risk. Right. It might be the difference about whether or not it runs through your heart. You know, and yeah, for me, if I did, if I did the machine does it for me, it probably didn't run through my heart. My kid who's a computer developer is more likely to run through his heart because of the computer. So it's, it's, it's maybe how you get the story best. Yeah. And so corpus linguistics is what you're talking about here. Corpus linguistics was another methodology just in my music. Yes. I actually use poetry as a method of analysis my PhD. But I can use it from an orthodox and graphic standpoint. So I've been using some methodology as my methodology. But because I've seen people during pandemics remote, I use it as one method of kind of reflecting back on findings. So I should throw a couple of poems at one of them was called The Pedigal of the Sonnet. It's about the kind of trials of higher education. It's kind of based on like Ozzy and Gaius, like the driving outputs in Sonnet form. What a lovely gift to bless your participants. They do quite like it, but I was thinking like that point, you know, it feels like putting the human side into it. So I was thinking, well, you've got my own thoughts into it, and you're putting it to an idea of methodology and setting it back and saying, how does this sit with me? And I was a bit like your colleague, I sort of listened to it a few times, but kind of it's in fact, you know, a file. So, well, yeah, everyone said, wow, this might be a room that would be explained for us. Oh, that's so neat. And in quality of research, we are the instrument, right? So that's, yeah, maybe it's a graphic. I could be an element of that. Yeah, that's neat. Yeah. And what was the methodology described? Well, it was in terms of the logical analysis. Interpretive point, that there's someone who's got a list of what we saw. No, and I just tire now. Yeah, so cool. So great. And then I use, oh, so I feel like ethnography is a method within that, which is good. Outstanding auto ethnography, yeah. So we can't wait for it, but how do you grade way standalone quality of it? If I can get the debunked, so I haven't had it fully in yet. So no, it's fine. It doesn't fit well, but I bet the load, yeah. Yes, moving this as far, but how did yours seem something you're with this methodology? Was that something that she just, she saw someone else apply? The world wasn't something that was part of course. The reason I'm always kind of curious to know how you know, we come up with different methodologies that we use. I'm also part of a task force that's thinking about research methods courses. Sorry. No, that's great. That's great. So as so the question was, how did my grass to come across this methodology that clearly you should find and she is a critical feminist scholar and that's that's her work and that's that that's her lane. And so she brought it in from the classes Lou Bailey and I'm not the advisor on her committee. She's just working for her. I'm just paying her. So Lou Bailey at Oklahoma State University, who does some great work in general women's studies, so that she brought it with her. Yeah, that's good. Thank you. I know I'm fine. So if you'd like one more time, please. Thank you.