 It is a very powerful idea, and this is not a new idea, but it is a relatively new idea when we are talking about a lot of money, that whatever you build with that money will be licensed under a Creative Commons attribution license. So this idea of actually putting the requirement to share right at the point of funding is a very powerful idea. And this is not a new idea, but it is a relatively new idea when we are talking about openness and sharing. And to make this point, let me show two models. This is the current system, which many of us argue is broken, and you could talk about educational resources, which is what this slide looks like, or we can look at academic research investments and have a very similar model. But essentially what happens today is governments or foundations or other funding entities want something done. They want something built, they want some kind of service produced, and they will put out a grant and an RFP to have that work done. We as education providers, as colleges, universities, other entities respond to those RFPs and we produce those resources. Typically, and then there is of course, there is a peer review process, there is quality control, there is everything that goes into making sure that they are good resources and useful. But typically those grants, A, only go to the grantee. So they are built by the grantee, the institution that got the grant. And the copyright is oftentimes held by the grantee, or it is held by the entity giving the grant, or sometimes it is a joint. But the point is that the grantee that got the money to build, let's say they are building a new curriculum, a new academic curriculum, they typically are under no obligation to share what they produce with anyone else. So if you look in the lower right corner here, you can see the contents typically only used by the grantee institution. The public then does not know about those educational resources, they didn't know about the grant or the RFP. And because the institution that got the grant is under no requirement to share whatsoever, they don't advertise that they've got it or that it's available, and they may not want to share. And then so what you get is the public is granted little or no reuse rights. They have no legal rights to either get free access or open access, open license access to the resource. And then the net result is frankly poor public investment and slowed access to those resources. So if you put the chancellor's office in this cycle, what the chancellor's office used to do before this policy came about RFPs for educational resources to be built, the copyright stayed with the chancellor's office. So the grantees didn't get any copyright, and Beth and others will talk more about this later. And then it was the chancellor's office and that one community college in California that had access to those resources and none of the other California community colleges could use that. So that's model A, that's the old model. The new model, and this is where the chancellor's office has decided to go, is to really optimize the system and the public investment that they are making and that the good citizens of the state of California are making with one very, very minor change. So all that they've really done to this model is to change that very first upper left point. So now they, the chancellor's office are issuing RFPs. And the only difference is they now require the CC by license on anything produced with discretionary grants or contracts. Educational resources will still be produced, grants will still be made, there will still be peer review to ensure quality and usefulness of the materials. Now the resources are CC licensed, in this case they're Creative Commons attribution licensed, which is our most open permissive license that we offer at Creative Commons. So that's a very good thing for downstream users because the requirement that they have is to give attribution, they have to give credit and provide a citation and a link back to whoever built that resource. But the difference is now that now that content can be used beyond the grantee. So you can imagine, and in fact you probably all saw this announcement in California recently, there was a 17 or 18 million dollar grant from the chancellor's office to Foothill and I think some other colleges to build two new academic programs and to work on an online portal for online learning. Well, that is under this new CC by policy. And so those academic programs that are produced, if other community colleges in California chose to use them, could actually take those. And this is a good thing. So even though, thanks James, DeAnza and Butte College. So even though maybe Humboldt wasn't part of this grant, Humboldt can still take all of those resources under a CC by license and use them. And from the perspective of the chancellor's office, that's a really good thing. Because under the old model, Humboldt wouldn't have had access now they do. And so does College of the Canyons and every other community college in California. And so that's good. This is also good if you're a taxpayer of the state of California because you can imagine if you live up north and you live near Humboldt, you'd very much like your local community college to have access to high quality resources that were produced with California state funds because gosh darn it, you're a taxpayer and you'd like your community college to benefit as well. So what you end up with is not only maximizing the use of the public funds, but the public now knows about those resources because they're out in the open, they're advertised, they can be used. And the public, i.e. all the other community colleges in the state and anyone else for that matter, has full reuse rights to those publicly funded resources. What do you get? Well now you get maximum public investment, maximum return on investment, accelerated learning opportunities because you build the thing once and everybody shares it. So this is, when we talk about open policy, this is what we mean. We mean that publicly funded resources should be openly licensed resources. Put another way, the public should have access to what the public pays for. Or from the perspective of a policy maker, the stewards of the public funds, in this case the chancellor's office, have a responsibility to maximize the impact of those taxpayer dollars. And if they can make one investment, make one grant, and affect ten community colleges in a very positive way, as opposed to just helping one community college, that's a much better return on investment. And it meets the goals of the chancellor's office, meets the goals of the community college system, and helps all of the citizens in the great state of California. And beyond, so I see we've got people from around the U.S., other states can also take these resources and reuse them, repurpose them in their community colleges, which of course has added benefits. Why did California choose to do that? Well, first of all, it doesn't cost them anything to share with Alabama or anyone else. Secondly, California is not going to lose any community college students to the community colleges in Alabama. It's not going to happen. And frankly, the California community colleges are already over-enrolled. But it's not a competitive disadvantage. But what California is really hoping is that Alabama and Arkansas and Maine and New York will look at this policy and think it's a good idea and their system offices for community colleges will adopt similar policies so that in the future, California's community colleges can take works from New York, Alabama, Arkansas, et cetera, and possibly repurpose those materials when it makes sense to do so. So these open policies have a tendency to spread because they become precedents and other policy makers see them, think that they're good ideas and implement their own policies. This is in fact part of what happened with California. So Washington state community colleges have an almost identical open policy that's been on their books now for four or five years. California knew about that. California looked at the NIH policy. They looked at the Department of Labor. They looked at other policies. And they said, you know, this is a good idea. We're going to follow suit. So what about Creative Commons? How do we play into this? Well, Creative Commons is a nonprofit organization. We are actually headquartered in Mountain View, California, near many of you. But we're a global organization. And our job quite simply is to make it easy and legal to share on the web and off the web. But most people are sharing digital resources over the internet because it's so easy to do so. And so we are a simple, standardized, legal, and robust way to grant copyright permissions to creative works, including educational resources, without giving up your copyright. So again, going back to the chancellor's office, the chancellor's office has always told its grantees and continues to tell its grantees that they are a work for hire, i.e. they don't hold the copyright. Chancellor's office gives the grant. Chancellor's office holds the copyright. Now what the chancellor's office is doing is saying, we're going to keep our copyright at the chancellor's office. And we're going to put a CC by license on everything that's built with our funds. This has benefits and I'll let the other speakers talk about what that is. So just so you know, Creative Commons has six different open copyright licenses including, and we've got two public domain tools as well, one to mark works in the public domain and one to actually give up your copyright and put your work into the public domain. That's what CC0 is here at the top. But there's this fleet of licenses, if you will. And what the chancellor's office has chosen to go with is the CC by license, which as you can see, is one of the most open licenses. And most open what we mean here is that you're giving other users in the world as many degrees of freedom as you can and putting very few restrictions on them. So what's happening with open policies around the world? And I'll ask my colleague Paul Stacey to drop a link in here. The UNESCO, one of the international governmental organizations, launched something last year called the Paris OER Declaration. And it made suggestions to the world's nations about open educational resources across many areas of OER. But the very last one here you see on the list was encourage the open licensing of educational materials produced with public funds. And so they're directly addressing this issue of open policy. And in fact, UNESCO is on a global tour right now working with ministers of education in no fewer than six countries for openers to ask those ministers essentially to follow California's lead and say from now on, Ministry of Education in Bahrain and Indonesia and other nations, please when you're giving out discretionary grants to educators and other entities, require Creative Commons licenses as a funding requirement. Another example is the U.S. Department of Labor. There are many community colleges involved with this particular grant. It's called the TACT grant. This is a $2 billion grant where U.S. community colleges are building next-generation academic programs to meet workforce needs. So these are programs in green technology, advanced manufacturing, allied health. And why do I bring this up as an example? I bring it up because the U.S. Department of Labor said if you want this money, you will put a Creative Commons attribution license on everything you build as a funding requirement. Again, almost identical to what the chancellor's office has done. And Paul, if you'd be so kind as to put in a link for our open consortium around that, that would be great. For those of you that are interested in the services that Creative Commons and all our partners are providing to these Department of Labor grantees, you can click on that link and learn more. And then Paul, if you drop in the link for the Open Policy Network as well, this is a new global network that we're spinning up and Una and her team at the Open Coursework Consortium are part of this. And the idea is that open policy opportunities are sprouting all over the world. Not only in California, but we're seeing them in Brazil and Poland and Indonesia and Canada and they're popping up all over the place where governments are starting to say, hmm, maybe we should require open licenses as a funding requirement on publicly funded resources. And so we're starting a new entity called the Open Policy Network. Creative Commons is helping to organize it, but really, it's tens of open organizations around the planet that share these same goals that publicly funded resources should be openly licensed. And then as governments at the national level, at provincial and state levels, at institution or system levels like the chancellor's office want to learn more about this, want to know what the arguments are for and against, want help with implementation, want help with policy writing, this network will be there to serve their needs. And so I just flashed an email to Barbara before we started this saying, hey, now that this policy is passed at the chancellor's office in California, Creative Commons and the Open Policy Network stand ready to work with the chancellor's office to help educate the people that run the grants, to provide webinars for our grantees that might want to know how to properly mark works with the CC by license, et cetera. So let me stop there. This is my information. If you're interested in this, the best way to follow me is on Twitter. I'm at CGreen on Twitter. And as I learn about great new things that people are doing around the world in OER or open policy, open access, open science, et cetera, that's where I put the information. Back to you, Anna. All right. Thanks very much, Cable. And great to hear about some of those other case studies within the United States and globally who are moving in the open education direction. All right. Next up is Dr. Barbara Elowski, who's at the academic affairs department at the chancellor's office. Barbara. Hi, everyone. Well, Cable, thanks. Pretty much summed up everything I needed to say. So I will point out my Twitter, which I seldomly use unless I find something really interesting. No selfies will be coming up on it. But I wanted to talk a little bit about how we got the CC by license going through the chancellor's office, what it means, and so on. And Cable did hit on several of the points, and I'll just go through them a little bit right here. So we know about the CC by license. And for those of you who don't, I did put up what it is. We did need to educate our staff on the Creative Commons Attribution license. But we did. And we started out with a definition of this license. So we have this here. Who requires it now? So when Cable and I first discussed the policy at California Community College Chancellor's Office, we discussed that already many of the grantees from our system are already receiving, not many, but some of them are receiving the tax grants. And so I had done a webinar with the chancellor's office on providing information for those colleges who are tax grantees or wanting to become tax grantees. And we looked at the requirements there. And they require the Creative Commons Attribution license on all materials there. National Institute of Health has a public access policy that requires Creative Commons by Attribution. These are just two of the large federal organizations that do. So now why should we require it here? So Cable hit upon is the public is paying for our grants. The grants are not the chancellor's office staff putting in the money or private foundations putting in the money or private corporations. These are public taxpayers that are paying their taxes and the money is then allocated for different organizations that are public institutions. And so the chancellor's office is public taxpayer, public institution funded by taxpayers. Once the public pays for these materials once, it's definitely inefficient to have the public paying for them again or not even knowing that they exist. So if we produce materials, and I'm just going to give you an example that I didn't put in the slide. For those of you who are from California, you may know about the basic skills e-resource that the chancellor's office, the academic senate and the RP group and also the administrators work together to compile. It's about 170 pages. It's meant, if you print it, it's meant to be an e-resource. It's meant to be a resource of effective practices and basic skills education from around, mostly around the state that have been developed on our local colleges. And what I was noticing is that I'm monitoring the basic skills initiative funding. And for those of you who are from out of state, this is funding that's going to the colleges to improve success rates of students who have mental ed courses and programs. And I'm noticing as I'm reading all of the reports each year that colleges are reinventing the wheel over and over and over again. And not because they want to, but because they don't know what's being done at other colleges. And so we put together this resource packet, which everybody can use online with the creative comments, CC by license, but if I am at my college, my home college, and I'm at DeAnza, and I know that Grossmont, where Beth Smith has some fabulous program going on, I don't have to wait to hear about that. I can look up right here on this resource. I can take this, I have the information. And so we wanted to make sure that that was all publicly available. So let me go on here. So along the, what the CC by license, the creative comments attribution license says, and cable did go over this, is that the creator retains the copyright. Of course, this depends upon the grant. So at the chancellor's office, and I have some slides on this, the copyright is not necessarily the creator. The copyright is owned by the chancellor's office. But in general, when you have a license, you create materials, you keep your copyright. But you have the ability to share it with other people, whereas you can share it anyways, but this way people don't need to call you up, ask you, do I have permission, and so on. I know many people say, why should I share what I'm already doing? And I worked hard on this and so on. But remember what we're talking about here is publicly funded materials. So if I worked very hard on something that I received a grant for, I wasn't doing this on my own time without getting paid, I received a grant, and these were public taxpayer dollars so that the public could have access to this. So what we added onto the chancellor's office, and this was passed by the Board of Governors, was that in the legalese that the grantees receive, there's a whole set of articles and there's a legal part. Part, now what's included on the contracts and grants is this condition, that the all materials will have the CC by license on it. Now I do want to explain one thing and why it's so important that Cable will come and do a webinar or a workshop with the chancellor's office and with anybody else, is that it's not just a matter of sticking a license on, which we could, but in order to make it so that other people can find the materials, there's coding that needs to go into this. And so that way, I know that Domi asked a question, well, how do you find other items that have a Creative Commons license on it? You can either go and do a search through Creative Commons and I saw some of the URLs popping up or if you have this code, it will pop up as well. Okay, according to the contracts that are funded by the chancellor's office, right now all work is considered work for hire, meaning that the chancellor's office owns a copyright. Now most people, unless you're signing the contract, may not realize that. So as a faculty member at my college and I'm working on a grant, I don't see all of the legal materials or what we would call the fine print. I don't see that, but if you were to be the one signing the grant, you would see that article two, number 18, includes that all grantee work is work for hire and the chancellor's office owns the copyright already. This was before. Now before that happened, the chancellor's office would contract with a district. The district would do the work. The chancellor's office had the copyright. The college or faculty were paid based on being paid out of the grant funds. They didn't have any legal rights to the material. Very often, if it was for something that was to be produced for their campus, they of course there was the understanding that it would be run on their campus. But a big example is the California Basic Skills Initiative where the professional development piece is run by the LA Community College District. Now this was granted before we passed the CCB policy and so in theory, the chancellor's office owns the copyright and doesn't need to share any of the materials. However, the whole purpose of this grant was to provide professional development for around the state. And so this now will be shared materials of everybody around the state and the country can use. After passing the license, chancellor's office still owns the copyright, but now the people who do the work, the grantees, and also everybody else will have legal access to the content that's been produced. So for example, if I produce a workbook or the eResource, let's say that was after we passed that policy, everybody else could have legal rights to it. And I know some people say, wait a minute. I don't really like that idea because why should I give away my stuff? Keep in mind you're being compensated. You, meaning whoever gets the grant, is being compensated for it to begin with. But now other people have the legal right, other people meaning other taxpayers have the legal right to use these materials without having to write for permission for it. Personally, I think this is a big win for the grantees. I don't see this as taking away any of the freedoms. I think it's seen as awarding freedoms because if one district is winning a grant and does the work, other districts can use the material to build off of it, to replicate it exactly. What they do need to do is they need to do attribution back to whoever did the work. So for example, if XYZ college had the grant and 123 college wanted to use that work, they would still say that this is a CC by-license and that 123 owns the copyright for it. So this is a big win because we get to share. Now this is a common question that's come in. And many colleges including the one that I work for have a contract where the faculty member developing the intellectual property owns the content that's developed. And so people said to me, wait, I don't care that the chancellor's office has this policy. My contract with my college says if I do work, I get to keep my copyright and I get to keep the intellectual property. So I want to just point out the difference. This policy is referring to grants and contracts that are coming from the chancellor's office. Typically they're competitively bid contracts. This is not coming out of the general apportionment funds. And so if your college has a contract with faculty that says they can keep the intellectual property that's developed, that would be for work that's developed in their general work. If they receive a grant from the chancellor's office, the copyright does go back to the chancellor's office for this. And the contract with the college is null and void in the sense that the faculty member already doesn't keep the intellectual property. Now with the CC by, the faculty member can use this and can even commercialize it. I mean, that's another common question I didn't write up is, well, what if somebody else commercializes what I do? And I can just tell you as personally, I'm co-author of an open textbook. And so what if somebody else commercializes the textbook? Well, there are a few things. One is the book is always free and open on the web as to be able to be used through connections or used through open snacks college. You can always download it as a PDF. Yes, somebody else. I mean, in fact, you can do Lulu print on demand and order it from them. And yes, Lulu makes money on it, but that doesn't mean that you have to pay for it. You can use it for free or you can print it or you can print it at your bookstore and then your bookstore and make money or you can decide you want to make the cover in the front cover in gold and the back cover in silver, real gold, real silver. And then you can contract out for that and the jeweler would make money on that. So, but the bottom line is there are free available resources on the web so that you don't have to purchase this. And I'm going to turn this over to my colleague Beth now. Great. Thank you, Barbara. Excellent. And Beth, who is the president of our academic senate, is now going to give us the faculty perspective for all of the California Community College system. So, thank you, Beth. Thank you again, everyone. I'm looking forward to sharing just a little bit of information with you about the faculty perspective. So, both Cable and Barbara, and even one of the initial slides, gave some really compelling arguments for why faculty would be interested in the benefits from these licenses and especially with the grant materials. I think most faculty are willing to share their work when they realize that the taxpayers have paid for it through the grant. So, often when faculty consider policy changes, they seek guidance from the senate or from other organizations in the state or the nation. And I looked at the AAUP's website for information on intellectual property rights and found some old documents there about their positions on intellectual property. But if any of you know of any new AAUP work regarding CCB or any of the more contemporary positions on these licenses, that would be great to share. And if we can't find anything on AAUP's website at this time, that might be something for faculty to think about encouraging their representatives to AAUP or connections that you may have there to take this issue up. Because some of the work that's being done around the nation now, not just in California, but we could all benefit from AAUP addressing this issue. And likewise, the State Academic Senate for California Community Colleges doesn't have a particular position on CCB. They just have positions related to intellectual property and how the faculty member retains the rights to that and the recognition that work that's done through grants is owned by the grant holders. So, again, there's room for some additional positions. There's room for a greater conversation about this through the faculty and the organizations that work on policy. And so, I would encourage all of you, wherever you are in the nation, to take that policy banner up. So, what is the policy primarily effect? And obviously, we're hoping that it has great benefits for students down the line. But really, what we're thinking about is the effect on faculty and the work that is created under the direction of the grant. And Barbara mentioned some of the grants that faculty are working on now in the state. We have some giant grants that were just awarded. The one to Foothill and to youth is just one of three, well, actually four that we're working on at this time. And we're anticipating more. And as that funding comes in, having this ability to say that those materials will be shared widely and available for others to sustain as they are or add to given proper attribution is going to really increase the intellectual capital we have in the state. And I think that's all leads of interest to the faculty as a whole, whether that's just discipline, specific intellectual capital or across disciplines and throughout the faculty academic senate. And so we want to continue this effort. And there are really positive effects for both the creators and the borrowers of this information. So if you look at a side-by-side comparison of the faculty's creative benefits and the faculty borrower benefits, and you see how faculty on both sides of the aisle can benefit, and Cable and Barbara talked about the same issues. But sometimes it's helpful if you're talking to faculty to have sort of that side-by-side comparison. So whether they're on the front end or the borrowing end, faculty needs to recognize how they're helping their colleagues as well as benefiting from the work of their colleagues. There are student benefits as well. And again, my colleagues on the fall this morning have also discussed what those are. But once those materials are available and we have increased intellectual capital that we have available to help students with their education, then we're going to see all sorts of great benefits for students in terms of saving them money or increasing their access to technology and the technological resources that they have. And then just adding to the knowledge base in that discipline is certainly something that all of us are after. In fact, that's why we teach in the hope that our students at some point will again contribute to the knowledge base of our discipline. Our students are extremely gifted and they have wonderful ideas we haven't pondered yet. So how do we add to that knowledge base in a way that it continues to support not only the faculty but students as well? So I think that's what we wanted to share from our position. We're certainly happy to take any questions and I'll turn that back to Una. Thank you very much, Beth. And I think we all were inspired by a couple of your quotes there about expanding the knowledge base. And that is why people get into education and so this kind of a policy really supports that at a very fundamental level. This slide is just a happy holiday for everybody and our webinars will be back in January. And we're so pleased to have all of you join us this morning or this afternoon, depending on where you are. And now we're going to move to questions. If you're on the phone, you can go ahead and speak up and answer questions. If you're on a mic, you'll have to click on the talk sign. Otherwise, the chat window sounds like we've got one. Go ahead. I didn't catch that. I think you're going to have to speak up just a little bit. Or if your microphone doesn't work, go ahead and type it in the chat window. We had a question earlier from Domi who's at Open Assembly. And she was asking about federated searches for CC by resources. And I wonder if Paul or Cable from Creative Commons can speak to that question. Yeah, sure. There are several federated searches out there. Merlot has a good one that actually searches, gosh, I don't know. I think up to 15 OER repositories simultaneously. OER Commons is a good search. Paul, would you put up the link for the Find OER page off the open website? Paul Stacey, who's also Creative Commons leads our work with the U.S. Department of Labor tax grantees. And Paul's built this really excellent website and page which he'll put the link in here in a minute where we've gone around and found and categorized all the big searches. Thanks Paul. So if you click on that link everybody, it kind of asks you what are you looking for? Textbooks, parts of courses, all of courses, videos, audio, et cetera. The idea is to make it easy to kind of narrow and scope what it is that you're searching for because of course there are different sites out there that specialize in different aspects of OER. And then of course for a meta search, you can always go to Google Advanced Search and Paul's got this on the page as well. And you can filter by CC by license. You can actually search for Algebra or Textbook or whatever you're looking for and tell Google to only feed you back CC by license resources. All right. Thank you very much, Cable and Paul. That's excellent information. We've got a question here from Lori. I believe this is Lori from Santa Barbara City College. What is the accountability for ensuring instructional materials created through grants are accessible to students with disabilities? Excellent question, Lori. Barbara, do you want to take that one? Oh, sure. I would love to. So I would say that the accountability because of the CC by license is no different than the accountability that would be in general. So the Creative Commons attribution license doesn't add or take away from the accessibility. I know that one of the biggest challenges is educating people in California. And of course, Lori knows this well aware. But for others in California, we have the high tech center training unit. And so I know that when I'm working on my own materials for a website and so on, and my instructional materials, I go and I work with the high tech center training unit. And I'll put the URL in. It's up there. Oh, good. And James answered already that the chancellor's office already requires this first section 508 compliance, although the CC by license really has nothing to do with this. In general, I would say that, for example, how I'm publishing, my book is actually Rice University is publishing it. So when they took it from the files that my co-authors Susan Dean and I gave them, they worked with their whole system. And part of the grant that was received to do that was to make sure that the materials were accessible according to 508. So I'm going to let Cable finish the explanation. Yeah, so Barbara's absolutely right. CC by or not CC by, the chancellor's office, I'm sure, requires that resources produced with chancellor's office funds are accessible and meet the 508 guidelines, et cetera. And so that you're compliant with federal law, but also are meeting the needs of students. So it's separate from the open licensing requirement. And that said, if something has a Creative Commons license on it, in this case a CC by license, there's an added benefit to accessibility. And here's why. If, let's say that Foothill just got its big grant with Butte, and they're going to build these two new academic transfer degrees, and they will do their very best to make sure that all the content in those degree programs are accessible. And they're going to pull out all the stops. So they've got accessibility experts, but you know what? They're going to miss something. Yeah, I guarantee they're going to miss something. And there are experts around the world that know more about accessibility than Foothill has experts. They're just are. It's a fact. And so when Foothill puts a CC by license on that work and they put it out to the world and they say, here's the very best we could do on our courseware. Here's the very best we could do on accessibility. We think we've got it done. There's going to be something that's not as accessible as it could be. And because there's a CC by license on it, somebody else out there, the CAST team out of Harvard, or the team out of Toronto that Utah Travarious leads, is going to look at that content and say, wow, you know, you missed information about people that are colorblind. Or you're using colors to convey meaning. And that's not something you can do for someone that's blind. Or you forgot all your tags on your images or whatever it might be. Because that content is openly licensed, those other entities can take it, modify it, make it more accessible, and then feed it back into California. If something is all rights reserved copyright and there's not an open license, that opportunity doesn't exist. I wanted to add to that just a little bit. Aside from accessibility, my experience has been that because Susan's and my textbook is out there with a CC by license, people have been very willing to come up and say, either I found a typo, which often happens going from a print book to putting it online, or to say, you know what, I've developed these other materials that go along with your book. And so that's just an added bonus to the policy. It doesn't have anything to do with section 508, but I do want to say it reminded me of that when Cable was talking about experts from around the world helping, is that we found the same thing with our open textbook that we found that a professor at University of Minnesota said, oh, I developed a text bank and you want me to donate that to the field because of the fact that you donated your book to the field. And so all of that is helping to increase student learning. Thank you, Barbara and Cable. That was excellent. Do we have other questions? Hello, this is Doug Hirsch. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. I just wanted to make a comment, not a question. Earlier in the presentation, Beth Smith made a point about improving or augmenting the intellectual capital in the state and in general. And I think that's a very important point that I wanted to just, I was about to say ought not be overlooked, but rather I wanted to say I'd like to just sort of cheer on because I believe that all of these efforts have the ability when there's critical mass of people sort of perking up and saying, wow, look at what they've done. This is great. I'd like to do something like that too. Or as mentioned earlier, people collaborating on a single work. And I think overall that would improve the quality of educational content for our students, which is really our goal. So I think that's a very important point and I just wanted to thank you for bringing it forward. And thank you for repeating that for us, Doug. I think we all agree with that as well strongly. So thanks, Beth. Let's see, still waiting for some more questions while we're waiting for those questions to come in. Beth, Barbara and Cable, would you have any closing comments you'd like to make? And let's start with Beth. Only that I'm very happy to have joined you today. And I always learn something myself when I participate even as a presenter. So thank you for helping to educate me more about what you're doing and what your goals are and how all of this is enhancing what we do for students. So thank you. Well, thank you, Beth. And I look forward to working with you more on this area. And Barbara, any closing comments? I would echo what Beth says. Of course, I learn a lot by presenting as well with Cable and with Beth. And I think that we need to keep in mind that we're on a mission. And the mission is to help educate our international workforce so that the students can afford their education and we can improve it. And I just wanted to say that when I started with this, my initial reason for starting with working with open education resources and having the textbook and open textbook was because I wanted to save students money. And we think that at DMZO it was save close to one and a half million dollars just on elementary statistics over the past six, seven years. But what's happened is as a result of having the textbook open, I have gained a lot as a professional. I've participated in communities of practice around OER. I've learned people have contributed. The book has become actually much better having gone through the various processes of people saying, you know what, it would be better if, da-da-da. And I think, oh yeah, why don't we think of that? Or Irene at University of Minnesota saying, here's a test bank of a thousand questions. Let's just share it. Or other people saying, you know what we could put, well, what Sailor Foundation did was they took the book and they paired it up with Khan Academy videos. And all of these things go to make the learning experience better for the students as well as for the faculty members. Well, thank you, Barbara. And we're glad that you're on a mission. All right. Cable, any final comments? Final comments. I would suggest that those of you in other states might take inspiration from this open policy and have similar conversations with your system offices. And if you would like support in crafting those arguments, drafting open policies, having someone come in and sit down with the leaders of your system and explain why this is all a good idea, you can certainly call on us at Creative Commons to support you in that and to come in and provide that kind of strategic and then implementation support. So if that's of interest to you, feel free to reach out to us. And then, as Barbara and I mentioned, we'll be providing some ongoing support in California so that it's not just an open policy on a piece of paper but actually become something that's implemented and well-understood and well-supported. Great. Thank you to Luna and to the CCC for folks for assisting with us today. Absolutely. So thank you all for coming today. And once again, thanks to our three wonderful presenters. As you can see, their contact information is there on the last page. And I think they're all very open to receiving follow-up questions. So thanks, everybody. And we'll close our recording for now. See you next year.