 But thank you for joining us today for the wrap-up session of the program for Open Scholarship and Education, a.k.a. POS. And thank you for joining and participating for the last four months, as well as this morning. We know the end of April is really can be a busy time, and we appreciate you taking time to conclude the program with us. This is a refresher. My name is Will Engle and I'm a strategist for Open Education with the UBC Center for Teaching Learning and Technologies. POS is really a group effort, and I'm joined today by some really fantastic people who help develop, organize, and facilitate the program. And I'm just going to have them introduce themselves. So I'll turn it over to Erin. Hello, everybody. It's great to see you all here. My name is Erin Fields, and I am the Open Education and Scholarly Communications Librarian at UBC Vancouver. I have had the most engagement inside of the Open Access and Open Research sections of POS, and I will pass it on now to Lucas. Hey, everyone. Welcome. I've been meeting you online through reading your comments and chatting. I'm Lucas Wright. I'm a senior educational consultant at the CTLT, and I've been interested in working around Open for the past few years now. I've been, I did most of my facilitation for this unit around Open Ed, and I'll pass it to Rian. Hi, everyone. I'm Rian Nambat, an education resource server from Center for Teaching Learning and Technology at UBC. So during the POS, I have been facilitating the discussion for the Open Ed model and also work on creating a MS module. And I read this postcode where I know how it was really engaging, and I learned a lot from everyone's discussion. So I'll pass it on to Stephanie. Hi, everyone. I'm Stephanie Savage. I am a Scholarly Communications and Copyright Services Librarian at UBC Library. I like my colleague Erin. I primarily help develop the Open Access content and help moderate the Open Access discussion in the Canvas course. Who should I pass it on to? I think I can take it back. I will just again acknowledge that this program is really developed by the UBC Library and the Center for Teaching Learning and Technology. And there were other people who contributed who aren't able to make it today, but particularly from the UBC Research Commons that helped develop the research section. I'm just going to go to the next slide. So I'd like to acknowledge that UBC Vancouver, which is hosting this session, is located on the traditional ancestral and unceded territories of the Musqueam people. And as we're meeting virtually or remotely today, I'd also like to acknowledge that here in the lower BC mainland, we're often on the unceded territories of the Squamish, Sleilatuth, and other Coast Salish peoples. They may be joining from different areas, and I'd just like to take a moment to appreciate considering give respect to the lands in which we are situated. Excuse me. I really appreciate the land where I am as it provides me with many different opportunities. And when I acknowledge that I'm on the unceded territory of the Musqueam people. It's really rooted in the understanding that I as a member of UBC I'm really privileged to be living and learning on a territory that is not my own. I do want to just mention quickly that one of the highlights opposed for me this year was having Kayla Larson, the Indigenous Programs and Services Librarians at the Wewa Library, do a session on the Six Arts of Indigenous OER where she talked about some of the tensions between open scholarship and Indigenous and traditional ways of knowing. If you weren't able to attend that session, we did record it. I'm just going to quickly drop the link into the chat. One second while I just paste it in, and you should be able to access it there. Just going on to the next slide. So here's our agenda for today and we hope through this session that you'll have the opportunity to reflect upon the topics and themes that were covered in the post and we're going to do a review of the areas and activities we did across the different units. And we also hope that you have an opportunity to discuss your thoughts about how you might apply some of the takeaways from post to your own practices as well as some of the considerations and challenges that you might have in doing so. And then we'll talk a little bit about how Pose will be wrapping up and have an opportunity to provide some feedback so that we can continually improve and think about and reflect and update Pose maybe for the next possible offering. And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Lucas, who will sort of provide a look back at what we've been doing. Wonderful. So just as a way to kind of reflect on the overall program I wanted to do a real high level overview of kind of looking back at what you all have contributed into the program. So, first of all, just some general chat so this is a short program as you've noticed we've spent four months in the program you completed four modules so one and open ed one and open research. Open access as well as a general module and open scholarship. It's an integrated program so this enrollment was a mix between students, faculty staff library faculty. There were two different folks and it was really exciting to see all the different types of conversation that happens when you cross different roles like that. There were 255 participants to begin with, and this kind of slowly whittled down as we went through, and throughout the program there was 235 discussion posts so some really rich posts around the provocations that were included at the end of each module we didn't always comment on the posts I think we spent a lot of time reading some of the detailed conversations that happened, and then 203 activities completed as part of the challenge bank. So as part of that challenge bank we made stuff and the activity bank we made things and I think part of at least my understanding of open is the importance of using our creative energy and releasing things into the world. So here's a few of the things we made. Will, do you mind moving to the next slide? There you go. So we scraped some data from some PDFs and I've just attributed this to Eric C. So just scraping using a program to scrape data. Secondly, we adopted some images. So this is a modified image. I've attributed at the bottom, but adding a little bit of value to an image. And we analyzed open text with voyons. So this is Siddhartha and an analysis that we did in the activity bank. And we formatted text with latex. So this is latex formatting that Victoria did. So just on your own what you may want to do as we end this program not right now but after the session is take a look at some of the challenges that other folks did. And I think in the application of open education and open research and open access, it can be really exciting to experiment and play with these tools. So just as a final way to reflect on the program. I'd like to ask everyone a question and rather than put you into breakout rooms or create a complex interactive activity, we thought we could just have a conversation around this today. And so for this conversation, please feel free to just unmute yourself. I don't even think we need to do raising hands unmute yourself and jump in and let's see how this can go. So at the beginning of pose we introduced a definition of open. And many of you would have come with an understanding of open. So I'm going to give you just a minute to think about that question and read it. And then I'll open it up to the group to just jump in and share your thoughts. So let you know when our minute of thinking is done and then we can just begin the conversation. All right. So I think that's a short minute I have two kids so my time super variable. Do you want to jump in? Yes, thank you. So I had taken courses particularly about open education and language learning as as you know the language textbooks are notoriously very expensive and and educators try to come up with ideas to make this more accessible and equitable to for students especially. So it was very exciting for me to to join and to see to seek ways and and I learned a lot in in the program. But my understanding of open got more and more complicated when we got to the latest later articles that we read and and I started to doubt is it more equitable now or not. And that was that was really challenging and interesting for me. I just wanted to share that it's it was really interesting. So yeah, I just wanted to say this thanks for sharing that is it more equitable. It's interesting question and I love that idea of complication and getting more complex as we move through the program Michelle. You weren't alone in that complication. And I think it's wonderful, because anything we we wholeheartedly embrace as good and positive just sounds like a cult to me. But I really, I would say this program almost radicalized me. I think open is a solution to a response to a flawed system that needs to be, you know, taken down to to its base again. It's basically not the best solution the best solution is, you know, challenging all of these like capitalists value systems imposed on knowledge and sharing knowledge and not until we do that can we truly have equitable openness. And sometimes that open itself is not equitable, equitable, and that the labor is not equitable and sometimes open is not the way to go for some things it's not the be all and all in the best solution for some things. But I love that. And also open data still scares me I have to go through that, that module one more time because you know, there's a lot to learn there but I didn't know what I didn't know at first. So now I'm really absorbing it so amazing course really enjoyed it. Wonderful. Thank you and I just want to read a comment from the chat just to from Elizabeth one thing that really stuck out to me was just how some of the details around open that I typically didn't think about. For example, or e.g. how users engage in the long term. It got as being discussed now more complicated than just slap the CC on this I love it if that makes sense. Dagmar. Yeah, I can only echo what was said I think maybe not adding too much but it really it has changed. You know, like I used. You know, I was kind of really fascinated by open access, you know, in all areas and research and education and so forth and we had been working a little bit and you will see him I have run with an open educational resource before. But I really felt how naive my whole thinking about open access laws through the course and I mean those resources like in many of the additional resources I couldn't log because of time and my busy job but it will be such an kind of amazing resource to go back also later. And so yeah what was said like I really didn't see the burden on like, you know, like also different shoulders which are connected to open access and I think that's really missing and a lot of academic discourses so I think it's very important that we are educated in that. And that we are knowledgeable about that so we can get the message out why open really matters and it's important. And also what needs to be done and what structures need to be changed. And yeah, those are some pretty tough structures. As we dealt with. Yeah, and especially for me I feel also the open science aspect was really interesting as well like to really rethink my field of philology. I mean we do we are doing a lot already there. So that was really nice to see but that's really something where I feel oh my God I really want to do stuff with that more. Yeah anyway, it was really super helpful and I feel like when I look again at the definition which I already completely forgot because so much time but it's in the chat there. I still feel that this is a lot, especially when as a social impact and inclusion, I think that pretty much mirrors this challenges that has some, and Michelle has been speaking about because that's kind of still missing right that yeah everything is, you know, kind of balance on the different shoulders and yeah, I'm kind of very, very motivated to work my part in that. Thank you. I like the idea of balanced on different shoulders. Just thinking about the application of this so just the second question there so we've kind of talked a little bit about a shift around your practices perhaps, or sorry it shift around your perception of the term open. How do you think this program is going to impact or your knowledge or your learning or what you experimented with this program. How's it can impact your day to day practice now. And yeah I'll just kind of open that to everybody. Well I know I'm going to adapt a lot of your resources. I'm going to take my own practice as an information provider to faculty and students. So much of it was so well presented and I was like oh this is a beautiful masterclass of educational design that I can, because it's open it's not stealing but I can, I feel like I'm stealing something really, really valuable. So, of course there'll be attribution but it still feels like it's too. It's one day on a day to day basis I think I'll really use this as kind of a touch a touchstone to come back to and revisit and see how I can incorporate that in in what we're doing on a day to day basis and how we're communicating to our users. Wonderful thank you Aaron go ahead. I know I'm long farther ahead maybe on some of the open scholarship journey than others of course is being one of the facilitators of post, but reaching back and thinking back to when this was all new. It becomes really important to understand how developing a workflow for your practice is extremely important because it's easy to forget because it's not streamlined into processes of publishing processes of sharing we're used to a very traditional outdated an old sort of system. So we have to make those workflows for ourselves and to follow through on those workflows. So I think that's what I took away when I started engaging in this is my need to put it into my practice in a very kind of conscious way, rather than thinking at the end when you're like oh if I just put a license on it but I think about all of these other aspects so think about thinking about that as a as a way of moving forward. Wonderful thank you and just to speak to the open resource side really quickly all of these resources are of course open and we encourage you to steal borrow remix etc and please share back what you do. As someone who's worked in this area a lot. It's so interesting to see how open courses and resources continue to grow, and so many other courses and resources just slowly disappear so I'm excited to see what continuous building on this course can mean. So thank you for sharing. If you have a chance to take a look in the chat there's a couple of additional comments in there. I hope in this section, we had a chance to kind of broadly reflect on the program, and now what we're going to do is unpack some of the specific units a little bit. Sorry, so I'm going to ask staff if you would do the open access unpacking. Absolutely. So I'll be speaking sort of on behalf of Aaron and myself who were your open access module creators and discussion moderators. So, being this early module we were so pleased to see enthusiastic participation right out of the gate, in particular the responses to the posted reading in the discussion forum. A lot of you thinking very deeply about the complexities of away and I think we've sort of heard that here today that it is a complicated to think about open access, judging from the content of the comments posted in the forum it appears at the article and resulting discussion, provided an opportunity to consider the implications of open access, both on an individual and systemic level. So we hope that you will carry that with you that critical understanding of open access with you. I think that's a long after poses over and it sounds like many of you have already started to think about that responses to the open access activities were also very successful and again we were impressed with the interest and curiosity that participants engage with the different content with just to mention a few that stood out to me I noticed that for several people who did the predatory publishing activity. It was actually more difficult than they would have suspected to define and to decide if a journal was truly predatory or not. So I think it was a relative of my own personal experience and perhaps explains why authors are so likely to return to that small subset of trusted journals that they've either personally developed a relationship or that are recommended to them or approved by their departments or colleagues. And I also enjoyed reading their responses to the how much does your reference list cost activity, which invited participants to take an article that they had either recently read or had written and track down the cost to access all of the items on their reference list as if they didn't have any library access to that material. So there were 24 responses for for that activity this iteration of pose, and the, the totals that people came up with varied widely from you know a couple hundred dollars to well into the thousands. So the, the activity also provided a look in sort of the crazy economics of scholarly publishing that most of us as you know being affiliated with a university or fortunately not often exposed to. So it was great to see that so many of you decided to do the public domain and traditional knowledge activity. This one had the highest response rate of all the activities in the open access unit, and I think really reflected the willingness of participants to engage in some of the more thorny areas of openness so it was great to see that as well. And I will pass it on to Aaron. Thank you Steph. So I'm going to talk about the open research part of pose, which I was lucky enough to, to facilitate. Also with my colleagues. Open research takes time and it can be extremely complicated. I think in fact this module is often considered the most complex as the principles and practices are often really new to participants and pose. Open research is often discussed within the scientific realm, rather than any of the other realms of scholarship. So sometimes you can't sometimes you're unaware of its possibilities. Even the peel article and the pose website really have different definitions of what open research means, which in itself can be confusing, but you engage with the content and the article with a lot of enthusiasm and a really great insight. The peel article really seem to resonate with a lot of people for peel humanities wasn't about data being focused on data in an empirical study sort of sense, but more we were looking at how it connected into humanities, when discussing open research, and the open research is on open workflows rather than that kind of positive sense, positivist, positivist sense of the confines of itself to being data, the experience of data as well as excluding the sort of ways of thinking about information that lend itself to different scholarship. So humanities fields are telling stories of difference, not congruence, so access and reusability are more important than replicability, if you remember those two terms, when we're discussing data. And many of you connected the potential of open research and open data practices with digital humanities work, and you introduce ways that open research practices can better align with the ethics of public trust and knowledge mobilization practices so there was like a really rich discussion happening there with engagement with that article. So the activities that you engaged in this module were really interesting what we tried to do with the activities is we gave you the large sense of open research and we gave you big platforms like OSF, if you wanted to engage, but also gave you opportunities to enact some of the smaller practices around open research. So I enjoyed how many of you were surprised and interested in naming an organization and file conventions, something that I think is really just common practice for many librarians or information professionals this is the work that we do is organizing information, but you saw the value of why that became important to organize information in certain ways, sharing a file that gave information about the files that you were sharing and the value of that as well as the types of formats, and how that actually impacts openness. Finally, your text analysis using voyant was particularly interesting as you noted the ways you can a nurse a different way to evaluate texts using voyant, which is a lot of you looked at gender terminology and how it was used in text, which was really fascinating. But you also talked about the potential data skewing that can happen when using text that have that editorial material attached, which was also really fascinating it was like a meta analysis of these open tools which was really great to engage in and is important in openness generally that kind of analysis of the process of what you're engaging in, not just the text outputs themselves. So, really great work. Hope that that section was was valuable to you and you learned a lot, and I will now pass it to Rie to talk about open education. Thank you. So I'll be doing the overview of the open education module, and we started with an exploration of what makes an educational resource open, and taking a deep dive into creative commons license and then exploring the five hours which is so we use retain the device to mix and distribute of open content. Then during the open chat with Tyler Larson we explored the six hours for indigenous area which are with respect with relationship, reverence, relevance and reciprocity. We touch on open formats and accessibility, and we look at finding and evaluating OEL, the benefits of using it, modifying or adapting it in order to help provide meaningful contextualize learning materials, as well as sticking into the workflows for creating and sharing open resources. And open education is not just access to knowledge, but also equitable participation in the creation of knowledge. With the idea that knowledge creation is a social practice, we explore different definitions of open pedagogy and look at what it means for students to be knowledge creators and examine both their opportunity, but also the risk privacy issues and challenges that are involved when working in the open. In the open education discussion, there were a lot of interesting discussion about Savas blog posts. Many discuss OEL takes a lot of skills, time, cost, resources and effort, and because of that, bigger institutes with power have great advantage which may reinforce power imbalances. And some discuss creation of OEL may actually help solve power imbalance by sharing the expertise and making the materials reusable. And some discuss about importance of incentivizing OEL, such as by making the tenure promotion requirement or providing support for creating OEL. And there are also great engagement around activity events. Some have shared experience about the Wikipedia article that they have contributed and saw the articles going over years. And some shared about the adaptation of text books and little language and works and OELs in non-English speaking countries or the translation of an open textbook into Japanese. And that's all for the open education overview. Awesome. So as you can hear, we covered a lot of different topics and themes and I'm just going to skip to the next slide if I can. So we're going to do a little bit of a more intimate and in-depth discussion about open scholarship and how some of the topics and themes that we discussed throughout the pose could maybe be applied to your own practice. And I do just want to say up front in my own experience that I can find breakout rooms sometimes to be awkward or even stressful for myself. I know other people feel that way, but we really do hope that you take this opportunity to sincerely engage with your colleagues and fellow participants in the program and discuss some of the key takeaways that you have at the program. As we put you into small groups, we do have people from different units and different institutions. Please do take a moment just to introduce yourself, maybe just let people know where you're from and maybe what you do in your unit or institution. So with that, we're going to put people into groups of around four and we're going to ask you to address these sort of three bullet points. So what have been the key takeaways or learnings that you've learned in the program? What are the actions? So what open scholarship actions are you taking or will you be taking that can apply to your own work? And then finally, what are the challenges or considerations? We know there's a lot for applying some of the open scholarship practices in different contexts. So we'd love to hear more about your thoughts on that. And as part of this, we're going to be asking you to sort of capture some of the discussion. So maybe as part of your group, you can designate a scribe or you can all contribute, but we do have a padlet. And you should be used to paddles by now. These are what we've been using for the unit reflections. Here's the direct link to the padlet. And this is just a place to capture those takeaways, actions and challenges. So we're going to go into breakout rooms for about 15 minutes. We will have us facilitators coming into the breakout rooms as well to help with discussions. And then we'll come back in the brief as a larger group. So I'm going to go ahead and let Lucas put us into breakout rooms. So I'm going to talk about the North American kind of notions of openness of copyright of open access and all that that we gave it a larger context about recognizing some of the privileges that we have by being, you know, in Canada, UBC. So we had those larger discussions and streams that kind of happened inside of the pose content and some people reflected on that being valuable, which was nice to hear. I'll know the group I joined also talked a little bit about the idea of open, having different contexts in different countries and Europe having sort of different backgrounds and but hitting upon some of the higher themes and open as well. Michelle. We have, we in our group had a few different backgrounds, a few of us were new, relatively new to open scholarship and pedagogy. And I think it was the feeling of, we didn't realize how naive we were about open until we got really really in depth and that was a feeling that I really had is like, oh, I, I look back on some of the things I said about open before and I was like, Oh, that was really naive. It's so much more complicated than that and someone was commenting how many decisions at every step in the workflow come into play that you have to consider when you undertake open it's just not something you can really do off the side of your desk and yet so people expected. Furthermore, there was some, some comments about even one, one thing is how much the technology to support open has changed and involved someone was commenting that in 2013, when they were looking at open there just wasn't a lot of options there that the that they could use to make quality work and that's really really changed as well, and really improved. I think maybe speaking on, on behalf of the facilitators a little bit one of the reasons we really wanted to do a longer program was to be able to get sort of beyond that intro level, and into some of the, the more complexities that can be an open and you know hearing the comments and both in the small groups in the earlier discussion are really great to hear that that we kind of hit upon that. So many challenges that people talked about in applying maybe open to your own practice. Maybe. If you don't mind I can call on on somebody from the group I joined but Emily do you want to talk a little bit about the, the open access challenges you're facing is in terms of costs for APCs and things like that or Karen. So as I was, as our group was discussing, we had a couple of researchers and I'm with the CRK and which is the National Academic Consortium in Canada and one of the things that is a bit of a challenge is that when it comes time to negotiate that's always coming out of the library budget and when if it's not coming out of the library budget for transformative agreements if you're paying directly, and it's coming out of the author's pocket there is no real kind of centralized APC funding opportunity in Canada. And so that's causing some issues chat when when it comes to kind of a cohesive approach because there is no easy solution that everyone can apply. And then the big problem as well is when you think about things like the tri agency funding that some researchers may get there are open access mandates there. But the funding that a researcher will get is kind of just a bucket of funding or it may be specifically earmarked for research purposes. And in order to take advantage of the research funding, and yet meet the open access mandate that comes attached to it you're now having to dig into your own pocket for open access funds. So those are kind of some of the. Sorry, will I was not quite prepared to put that into your sentence all at once. So that's kind of some of the things that we're thinking about in in in the Canadian context is, it's happening beyond the library because it's researchers that are doing the publishing it's researchers that are doing the authoring. But then you've got this government policy that comes into play and that is to a certain extent, regulated or not at different levels and so, yeah, that's probably speaking. Erin's going to hand up several very happily pass it back over to her. I just had. It's wonderful that you talked about that because I have a very local example that just like finally came to a conclusion yesterday about a faculty member who had a try agency grant that requires open access to be open access in 12 months. But the publisher requires a 24 month embargo so there's like the publishers are creating a system where we can't actually meet the standards that are being in place by the try agency. The requirement of that 12 months and even in trying to negotiate that with them the negotiation is there is no negotiation, you're going to publish it within 24 months it's it. And because they're the bigger publishers like Elsevier, the faculty members are more than likely just not going to comply until after the 24 month period. Right. So we're setting them up to break the rules of the grant because the publishers are negotiating in a way that is is ethical and meeting those standards. More pressure needs to be put on the publishers to actually at least meet the standards that are being put forth by our national associations but who is going to do that it's not going to be the faculty members are either going to comply pay or not comply. Right. So, it's tough. I think there's definitely, you know, I think one of the themes that came out during poses. There's a lot of these structural barriers and at some point they're sort of these large structural barriers but there's also. And sorry Karen to put you back on the spot but small structural barriers to where it's individual people's labor and time that goes into that I know you had a just a recent experience and trying to publish open access as well. Perhaps I can also share about that so for me like reasons. By the way, my background is a first year PhD student at UBC School of Social Work and recently my professor and I we had a publication and we really want to make it like open access but it's $5,000 and as a as a student I was a teacher with very like with very very limited funding research funding and yeah my professor just said I care I really hope that it can be open access but yeah to be honest I think you just need to put this idea aside because you're not going to pay for like that $5,000 so yeah so so it it happens every day and it just is just yeah so sad it cannot be open access yeah. Thank you for sharing that. Any Michelle I see your your hand is up. I know that in the UK they had their funding bodies, negotiate with the publisher saying no. Who would do that in Canada. Who would go to bat for us because like, I just feel like how nice would it be to have someone more powerful than like us, we're powerful in our own way but not with like, taking on publishers. I'm going to look at maybe Aaron or Emily to to respond to. I mean, I can certainly speak from the kind of outside of the university perspective because within the university, your library does an incredible amount of work on your behalf. I will, you know, thank your librarian, the next time you see them thank all of them that they do an enormous amount of direct work with publishers, and then for some of the kind of bigger publishers. And I know Aaron had mentioned, I think it was Springer or Elsevier. And for the publishers on that kind of scale. There are academic consortia that negotiate with them on behalf of many institutions at once so CRKM has 76 academic members across the country, UBC is one of them. And we do that kind of advocacy and negotiation. It's a work in progress. We're very aware that there are all of these challenges with open access and we're still trying to figure it out ourselves to a certain extent as well because there's, there are a number of different open access models which obviously you've been discovering. But, and they're not always going to be right in every circumstance, and then the challenge becomes they're not always right for every institution. Some larger institutions may have more capacity to jump into a particular open access model that remains to a certain extent, modeled off of what libraries used to pay. There are other direct to open like subscription models that a library may have extra end of year funds that they can invest in and small institutions may not. So, while the consortium does, and I'll say consortia because I know the other consortia in Canada are doing this as well. While we do a lot of work to try and advance open access we're also very mindful that it has to be an equitable opportunity for the libraries that are participating and that does slow it down a little bit while we try and figure out what exactly that's going to look like. Yeah, sorry I didn't want to like undercut how much like I understand like how much it's perfect. It's a perfect opportunity to put your researcher, like to put researchers in touch with the fact that at your institution, the library is that resource. I think it's a whole conversation about whether it's appropriate or not at a different time. I kind of want the Canadian government or a shirk to go in and just say like hey, we're giving them this money. So you got to play ball with them. I think that's like my local MP to take that. This is this is my naive being like. Well, I think that's possible to like to actually do a national kind of push for open but the problem is with another challenge, which is tenure and promotion practices are still warranting that if I publish in nature, I get major points versus if I don't. So if we're saying now at the national level there must be compliancy, but still at our local institutional level that you still have to publish in these major journals, then that those two things aren't meeting up and I think we saw some of that backlash happening in the UK, where there were authors that signed a document saying that you know what I'm going to publish in these large journals because I need. I need to this is where my community is etc. So I think that it's an entire system it's not just the one system just make put pressure on the publishers but also there has to be pressure on institutions to think about tenure and promotion practices a little differently. Awesome and maybe just to slightly shift the conversation to from open access to open research I just wanted to see if anybody had any so we talked a lot about sort of the structural challenges that persist. One of the things I took away from the program this year particularly as somebody who's not engaged in open research and going back to a bit what Aaron talked about was the idea of developing workflows, but also, I would say really documenting and sharing and publishing those workflows openly I think to be really a powerful way of informing an open practice but my challenges time and the labor that it takes so it's much easier to do my workflow than it is to publish and get it into a format that I am willing to share. I'm wondering if anybody else had sort of personal challenges and taking up some of the open work. Yeah, yeah, that's correct. Yeah, I'm thinking a lot about things but I'm still kind of in the process so I feel like the whole open research flow open science and also certain things of vulnerability of getting data out, but then also having my own more transparent workflows I wouldn't say that I'm totally chaotic or whatever. There's definitely kind of potential to reorganize and get things in that are beneficial for me but also for, yeah for the public so to speak so so I feel that I have to kind of reorganize myself and having gotten this tool just also like it's more time as you say it's such an who's kind of like, I have to think about a clever way how I'm also kind of rewarded for doing that in a certain way and that brings back the open research, open research publication format that it's not just the journal articles and so forth but that there's appreciation of certain things and how to do that clever and the structure I'm in. So I think, yeah, there's really complicated reflection process which was started through to the session so it's not kind of real answer but like the same it's a lot of more it's more time, but then a question also. It can also help me maybe for future research project because I can so that's all the things of retaining data and so forth so I feel there's a lot of like benefits of investing this time personally so but I want to try to find a way that you know it's balanced in a way and not just too much time, but not enough personal benefit for me. Yeah, so that was that's a really interesting process would started through reading about that so that was very helpful for me personally. Right yeah and I like that articulate articulation of the balance thanks thank you for sharing that. Anybody else want to share something that they discussed in the groups or some thoughts that maybe these discussions have brought up to if it's okay to end on. It is a lot of work, it's a lot of time we know there's value in it I think we have a feeling about that. But maybe when thinking about engaging in open scholarship is don't think about it as a whole think about it in parts, which is what small modification can I do now to my already existing workflows that lends itself more to open and then once that just becomes a part of your practice and something new. We often talk about open as a continuum. You can do something very tiny, you can go all the way. But if you're new to it going all the way seems so daunting but noticing one small item saying that yes putting creative comments license ensuring that I have that on my content so that people can just use it that is at least a start. I think think that way think about small steps and then just slowly keep adding them and then suddenly five years down the road you're like oh I'm doing a lot of open I just didn't think I was until you take that step back. Thank you for that comments really true and when I work with instructors who are doing open ed stuff for the first time I always try to say it's iterative you don't have to do it all in the first go like and things can always be improved. With that I'm going to share my screen again and turn it over to Lucas to talk about maybe getting some feedback for how we can improve the program. Wonderful things well and so if you can yeah so as part of pose this is our second iteration of it and each iteration because this program is really for you and for who takes the program. We really want to get some feedback so that we can make changes to the program, we can amplify parts of the program that you like. So in a short feedback survey and rather than sending it home with you, we'd like to give you a few minutes to take it now and part of that is just so we can get some uptake. Generally what we find is when we send out surveys we get much lower uptake. So we have a survey it's going to take you between two to six minutes. So I'll give you about let me time out six minutes now. I'll let you open the survey I think re is shared it in the chat there. It's a completely anonymous survey and we will use it to refine and redesign the post program. So please go ahead now I'll time you for six minutes and then afterwards we're going to wrap up the session. So thanks for taking the time to do that again please feel free to continue completing it after the session. And I am going to turn it over to our facilitation team to wrap it up. Okay yeah so I will be just kind of closing up with some last minutes, like administer via I guess. So the course cohort closes on May 15. And we have had people contacting us for possible extensions. I just wanted to mention that we are hoping to make sure that we have the certificates of completion sent in early June so there is a bit of a time. Requirement for us there. If you feel like you could. If you do need some sort of extension you can contact us and we can see if it works within our timelines. So the CTLT events team is going to generate PDF certificate of completion and that's going to be sent to all of those who have completed their work through an email again sent in early early June. And in terms of the actual course content the course content is openly licensed which means that anybody can use it, go back to it, modify it for their own purposes. It has that CC by 4.0 license that we all know what that means now. And we've also created a page on the post website under resources where you can download the download the course content in an XML format should you want to use that format. I believe the link that we currently have there might be to the old content so we'll we'll have to regenerate that XML format but it'll be made available to you. So, feel free to use the content reuse it however you choose and even if you want to let us know how it's being used we're just I'm just curious it's exciting to see when your content gets reused so do feel free to to reach out to us. And I believe that is the end of our session today but if you have any questions that you would like to ask now is now is your time. So not seeing any questions questions but it just again really wanted to thank everybody who participated in post the discussions the activities all that was amazing. And it made it a lot of fun for us on the facilitation team so really appreciate everything that you've done. Yes, thank you everybody for participating this was really, really enjoyable to read all your ideas and comments so thank you very much. Thanks everyone was great to get to meet all of you.