 Because it really is a relationship model where Ronnie and I and other members of our team are in teacher classrooms, they're in each other's classrooms, we have the historians in the classrooms, and we're right where the teachers live, we're right there. And every time we do a lesson study at the very end of the day I always say to the teacher, thank you for letting me into your, having me in your room. And you can just kind of see that they're very, they're very proud of their kids in their classrooms. And that's where we should go. You know, if we want to change what they're doing, that's where we need to change it, is right there. Where they, you know, we interact with the students when we go into the classroom, we interact with the curriculum, and it's all very, it's very hands on. And it's hands on right where it should be, right, where the kids interact with the content. They ask you to list the roles, what everybody's title is and what their role is and how much time they dedicate, and you do this nice little chart and you put it in the grant and you submit it. And if you don't submit it in such a way that you even have a percentage of somebody's time, maybe it's going to spend 10 hours a week, or the historians are going to do this many hours, the readers can actually mark you down for that in your grant application. But what I think that, that people should know is that as you start working on this grant, those roles and those relationships in that amount of time changes based on what starts to happen in the grant. So at the beginning we used the model that most teaching American history grants use, where we have scholars come in and historical scholars and Pulitzer Prize winning historians and these academics who are very much into the research of what they're doing. And their knowledge is incredibly important to us and it helps guide our content. But what we have also discovered is that they come in and they want to give a lecture as though they're lecturing to a room of graduate students. And there is always value in that, in increasing the personal content knowledge, history content knowledge of the audience. But we've also realized that we need a historian who can be in a little bit more flexible role, who isn't just giving a lecture but who is helping the teacher to grapple with their own misconceptions as an adult learner because they then have to translate that for the students. And so we find that we need multiple historians and multiple faculty members in multiple roles. And sometimes you go through a few and it's not really comfortable and you have to figure out how they fit into those roles. And so I think that somebody like Mimi, who works with us on a regular basis and Mimi and I talk almost every day, we email, correspond by email, we talk multiple times during the week. Historians we may not converse with them as often but they have to be apprised as to what's going on. So you need a very clear communication stream with all of those people and then you need to be flexible as to how people are fitting into the grants. So having that relationship with historians that you can ask what seem like simple questions of them so that teachers can really begin to organize those thoughts and that information in their head so that when they do teach their lessons it's very clear to their students. Because teachers can't teach a concept that they're not clear about. Just doesn't work. It comes out as confused for the students as it was for the teacher. So I think that the role with historians is very important and I think that any new grantee or a struggling grant really needs to think about the fact that you have to be a little flexible and find where people fit and if someone doesn't fit that role you can't make them. You have to go find somebody else who can fit that role and utilize the expertise of the other person in a different way and I think that's probably one of the biggest lessons we've learned from an administrative standpoint.