 Okay, hi everyone. So let's get started. Okay, so the title has changed a little bit, not very much. So I've added a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but romantic online course design and then the role of the arts and humanities in effective online and blended learning design. So my name is Neil Hughes and I work at the University of Nottingham. So I have two roles. So half of me is director of modern language teaching in the departments of languages and cultures. And then the other half of me, I am a digital learning director. So I'm one of two digital learning directors in the Faculty of Arts. And we kind of act as a bridge between academics and learning technology and senior management with responsibility for teaching and learning at the university. So I've been in that post for I think two and a half years now, almost coming up to three years. Okay, so let's get started. So when I submitted the abstract for the class, I must admit that I had very little idea of the ground that it would cover or of the direction of travel that the class would take. So at the time, while I was sure that as the abstract suggests, at the very least that I wanted to make a political point about the value to society of the arts and humanities. And then I wanted to use blended and online learning design to illustrate the point. I was just sure about how, how I'd go about it. So I'm happy to say that several months later, I have a bit, bit of a, I have a bit better understanding of what I think arts and humanities thinking, as well as possibly the social sciences to can add productively and imaginatively to the blended and online learning design field. As I say, I now have a clearer picture of the arts and humanities potential contribution to this important field. This session represents my first attempt of fleshing it out in a formal context. So while I welcome the opportunity, it does mean that some of the concepts and arguments presented are still experimental and as such that analytical and practical utility is still being explored. There's also, I suppose, a danger that some of the thinking might bear a resemblance to ideas articulated elsewhere in the, in the excellent literature that I've simply not encountered due to the relatively short amount of time I've been working on this question. If anyone does spot any overlap during this masterclass with the work of other contribute contributors to the debates, or indeed any other avenues they think might, might fruitfully be explored. I'd be grateful if they could point them out either in the chat or in the comments at the end of the session. So at this point, you might be asking yourself, what am I doing as a masterclass delivered by such a self-confessed novice. So to reassure you a little bit, I'll begin in the best kind of rhetorical tradition by seeking to establish some credentials, at least for appearing here today to deliver this class. So alongside other areas of research, I've been looking at aspects of online learning with a particular emphasis on blended learning for a number of years. So much of this work has had a modern languages focus, as you can see from the titles of some of these publications. So for example, in the third publication on the left, you can see that in conjunction with some colleagues in Chinese, we came up with an approach to blended Chinese language learning design. And then you'll also notice here, particularly on the right hand side, some references to work in the area of discourse analysis, which has will become apparent is also relevant to this class. It's also worth mentioning that in 2020, I was named Alts Learning Technologist of the Year in the research project category for work related to the Moodle redesign initiative, which is mentioned in the second title on this list. So nurturing effective digital learning design in the arts and humanities, the Moodle redesign initiative at the University of Nottingham. So as the title of this article suggests, the focus of my work has shifted somewhat from the kind of the exclusive languages focus that it had previously. So looking at the issue of blended learning design in the arts and humanities more generally. So one of the issues I've been working on recently is the student voice and how it can be heard in debates about the future of arts and humanities teaching and learning in higher education. So this is something I talked about at the recent conference and a topic I'll be returning to in this paper. Okay, so it's important to point out that most of the practical design work I've done has been in blended learning contexts. So with a particular emphasis on the online dimension of campus based undergraduate courses and modules delivered through VLEs in both the arts and humanities and social sciences. And so it's on this aspect of online design that much of my attention will concentrate in this class where in my experience design practice can sometimes be quite poor. So why do I think the questions raised in the masterclass are important? Well, because one, I think that the student experience of this dimension of their undergraduate learning, as I just said, often leaves quite a lot to be desired. And I'm keen to explore why this might be the case both from the academic and student perspective. I'm also quite keen to use this knowledge to inform efforts to improve the quality of design and consequently students experience of online and blended learning in higher education. Finally, and returning to the political point, I do think that if we are going to save the arts and humanities from this government's obsession with STEM and its cuts to arts funding, we'd rather belize the fact that many of its members have a background in the humanities. We need to work harder to demonstrate the relevance and practical value of arts and humanities thinking to different contexts, including in this case online and blended learning design. So how's the class structured? So in it will will pursue three main lines of inquiry. Firstly, we'll explore ontological questions about online course design, covering its material human and socially constructed dimensions, as well as the meaning that online learning has for key institutional stakeholders in particular academics. Next, we'll explore ways in which we can use typical arts and humanities methods such as content analysis, discourse analysis and phenomenology to explore the reality of online learning design, particularly in the context of campus based courses. And then explore how we can use the findings of our research to underpin practical solutions to some of the challenges we face as academics, learning technologists and online learning designers. Finally, we'll draw some conclusions and possibly indicate some directions for future research related to the ideas set out in this class. So the first substantive point I'd like to make is ontological and concerns how, from an arts and humanities perspective, we might conceive of what constitutes the objective study in this masterclass online learning design. So in most arts and humanities disciplines, attention is focused on human societies and cultures, as embodied in their history, language, literature, music and arts. Much of the focus is on texts, artifacts and other cultural products which have physical and material product properties, as well as well as being results of human subjectivity and action. So from the arts and humanities perspective, the material aspects of artifacts and texts are of little import on their own, and are only relevant when considered in conjunction with the contingent knowledge beliefs, attitudes, values and interests that people bring to bear in processes of cultural production. So much like in the social sciences, arts and humanities scholars also believe that human engagement with the everyday materiality of artifacts is shaped by the legal and institutional structures that people operate within. In some instances such structures enable human agency, and in others they circumscribe and constrain people's ability to act on their artistic and intellectual will. So in our own context, i.e. of online learning design, such structural enablers and constraints include on the one hand national legislation introduced by governments to, for example, establish accessibility standards, and on the other governance procedures at the local institutional level that have been established by universities as part of efforts to promote wider uptake and more effective use of the digital assets they've invested so heavily in in recent years. So in terms of the institutional standards and procedures, these are often sources of conflict and tension due to what's often perceived as the top down managerialist way in which they're introduced and the lack of grassroots academic input into decision making. And many institutions, including my own, one of the biggest battles recently has been around the issue of lecture capture with many colleagues bulking of what they see as institutional dictates forcing them to record their classes against their will. Okay, so in this next section, we're going to start thinking about how we might apply this arts and humanities framework to the design and production of online learning. So to start with, we can see that designers draw on a complex myriad of enabling technologies, tools, platforms, forms of representation, and other types of artifacts, some of which are mature, others that are emerging, some of which are tangible, while others given their digital origins are less so. So these constitute the paints, brushes and canvases that learning designers use to give expression to that pedagogical beliefs and imagination. So what we might refer to as the materiality of online learning design. In the ambivalent ontology of digital artifacts, Kalinikos et al. help us get a handle on the nature of digital artifacts by focusing attention on the features and potential affordances that distinguish them from physical entities and other cultural records. So the main difference they argue is that digital artifacts are far more mutant and changeable than physical artifacts and paper based documents. Okay, this is certainly the case in online courses where mutability and the potential for constant revision and change is rendered by what I consider to be the main possibilities, potentialities and affordances of the digital assets. We have at our disposal. Okay, so what exactly are the potentialities and affordances, the digital platforms, tools and applications. As I said, we have at our disposal. So here I outline 10 potentialities, but I'd be happy to get your feedback on the list and accept that there might be more than the 10 I described. Actually, I was doing some reading this morning and came up with a couple more, but anyway, we'll leave those for the minute. So the first potential affordance is that of modularity. So this refers to the fact that the courses we design are often an amalgam of different platforms, applications and even modes of delivery that can be combined together in different ways to achieve pedagogical outcomes. So the second potentiality I've listed here is multimodality. So online courses afford multiple modes of representation, thus written texts, images, audio and audio visual texts can be mashed together in ways that motivate learners and persuade them to engage in activity effective for learning. The third one, editability. So, I think just something I mentioned earlier. That's the idea that courses can be continued continuously modified and updated in response to changes in institutional norms, student feedback or changes in the syllabus. And someone as Dorian Peters explains in his book into her book, sorry, Peters interface design for learning. One of the most important aspects of online learning is that the context is adaptive and can evolve on the basis of evaluation and experience. The next potentiality is interactivity, arguably the most important of the potentialities. So the platforms and tools we use offer a range of opportunities to trigger interactions with content peers and tutors that importantly are contingent on user choice. This affordance undergirds much of the action that's effective for learning, such as exposure to new ideas, checking understanding, collaboration, the production and sharing of knowledge, processes of reflection, and the scaffolding of learner engagement with complex concepts and frameworks. Next, number five, co-production. So content can be created as much by the user as by the designer. So such user participation in content production clearly sets online courses apart from print texts. Sixth, reprogrammability. So thus by manipulating code, the HTML code, for example, designers can modify key features of their courses. Shareability. So as well as ideas, digital content can be easily shared with colleagues working on other courses. So as in the case of MOOCs, they can be open and borderless. Nine, so there's this idea of traceability. So who is using the course, how often and for how long can be monitored by designers and acted upon to improve design quality. And then finally, communication. So one of the ideas that I'm most interested in pursuing is the idea that the online component of a course is a rhetorical situation in which the designer can use different modes of communication and discourse strategies to persuade students to engage with learning content and interact with each other. So this is a topic we'll, again, we'll be returning to. Okay, so again, as I mentioned earlier, while the potential to use these affordances in different ways exists, there are little consequence, consequence and less marshaled in the accomplishment of some human action, in this case, effective course design. So the extent to which this is actually happening is largely an empirical question that can be observed can be explored using observable data, such as the action logs in Moodle to support to explore questions of, for example, traceability, of the frequency and lengthen student contributions to discussion boards to detect the levels of interaction and social construction of knowledge taking place in any single course. So in the case of communication, we can employ discourse analysis to explore the role that different text types and discourse strategies play in communicating meanings of students and persuading them to take part in action effective for learning. So in this next section, I'd like to explore how hypothetically this might work in practice. So in the case of written texts, using the border ladian concept of solicitation, in which users or consumers are lured into action by the promise of enticements and gifts. So, yeah, sorry, so we're going to look at it hypothetically. Using this border ladian concept of solicitation, which users consumers are lured interaction by the promise of enticements and gifts. So in their study of solicitation in the context of social media. So Chris and hard you identify four enticements Facebook offer to solicit users. So they identify these as protection, freedom of expression, personal connection and altruism. So so in this extract from Lilquist and hard use article, which you can read, we see how Facebook seeks to entice its users to engage in interaction by offering the gifts of freedom of expression expression and protection from bullying and potential violence. Let's have a look. So our community standards aim to find the right balance between giving people a place to express themselves. So freedom of expression and promoting a welcoming and safe environment for everyone. As you can imagine, striking the right balance is a tough job that we approach by focusing on a few principles, keeping you safe. There's zero tolerance for any behavior that puts people in danger, whether someone is organizing or advocating real world violence or bullying other people. So you can see that this idea of using of offering the gifts of freedom of expression and protection at the same time to entice users to engage in in action. In the Facebook context. Okay, so. So in the following fictional extract this fictional from an online course introducing a discussion forum activity. You can see how I've used the both gladian idea of solicitation in an attempt to entice students to do something they are notoriously reluctant to do so contribute regularly and meaningfully to a discussion forum. So in this case. The students are enticed by the promise of gifts, which I suggest could have the effect of luring them to take part in action that while at once pedagogically beneficial is also very demanding in terms of both time and cognition. I'd like to invite you to spend a few minutes reading the text to identify the gifts and enticements offered here to persuade students to take part in the discussion forum. So I think they're around. One, two, three, four, five, six, I think I counted seven gifts. If anybody were to offer up any ideas. Maria has just commented to maintain connections and practice your English. Yep, absolutely. Yeah, so the, so the gift of foreign language skills is there. Yeah, the gift of participation and making connections. Absolutely. Caroline said to articulate thoughts in an environment of mutual respect. Yeah. Yeah. That's there. So, so this idea, again, I suppose an environment of mutual mutual respect. So we're thinking about the idea of protection that we saw in the context of Facebook. So free from abuse. Also free from something else as well. Another potential threat. Couple others have come through. We will not sell your data and the gift if a provide non commodified space and Sarah Sahara said you will not be commodified. Very important point of real, real concern for students. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So this protection from abuse and commodification, which is not something that you see in the case of Facebook, obviously, yeah, anything else. Nothing else has come through yet. Okay, okay. So good. So, so the ones I put down so the gift of participation. Protection, again, freedom of expression as we saw in the context of faith Facebook, the gift of knowledge and skills. Personal connections, as Maria mentioned, we've got the gift of foreign language skills for non native speakers. And then also the gift potentially of improved assessment performance at the end. But a couple of other things that I think are worth mentioning. So it's also worth mentioning how the use of us and we pronouns adds to the sense of intimacy here. So as does the tongue in cheek reference to Facebook, and the way it exploits its users commercially. So humor as well can be a powerful ally to the online learning designer. So in work on slogans in political contexts I demonstrated how slogan writers use humor to build community cohesion and social harmony. Okay, so one of the issues I, I've been interested in exploring in my own context is why in some cases, at least, academic colleagues fail to take advantage of the properties and affordances of the digital design tools they have at their disposal. So as part of the mood or redesign project mentioned earlier, my collaborators and I carried out content analysis on a sample of moodle pages designed to accompany face to face teaching. So, so this revealed a number of deficiencies, including lack of attention to the composition navigation and the look and feel of the user interface. An absence of scaffolding to support student engagement with content limited use of multimedia. Little to no attempt to trigger online social interaction. The absence of any meaningful narrative guiding students through the learning and trigger triggering action effective for learning. Then also scan use of advanced VLE tools in, in this context, very argued. So in the, in the context of advanced VLE tools, we argued, despite that undoubted pedagogical value, particularly within a subject context that exhausts the importance of writing skills, argumentation and debate. There was scant engagement with such tools. In one isolated case, a team tool module, there was evidence of the discussion forum tool being used by one of the tutors within her seminar group. However, this was the exception rather than the rule. It emerged that while some experimentation with forums and other advanced VLE, VLE tools have taken place within their subject areas. Such practice had largely been abandoned due to low levels of student engagement. Why is this the case? So to interrogate why questions in the arts and humanities tradition, researchers often rely on a phenomenological approach in which they delve into people's lived experience of phenomena from the subjective or first person point of view. So as part of the Mool redesign project, we drew on such phenomenological methodology to explore arts and humanities academics and lived experience of online learning from that own perspective. So before setting out the findings of this research, it is worth pointing out that the research interviews were conducted a few years ago and that the views expressed may have changed in particular because of colleagues obvious recent experience of online teaching. Although I suspect maybe not as much as we may think, given much of the recent discourse about the poverty of students online learning experiences during the pandemic. So anyway, so on the positive side, the research revealed enthusiasm in some quarters for digital technologies, leading to intense use experimentation, careful reflection and creativity, as well as as well as as well as of early adoption of practices that are becoming increasingly across the HE sector, such as recording lectures and making them available to students asynchronously after class. Less positively, the study identified widespread concern about the demands that engagement with digital technologies place on academics time. Very common frame. There's also evidence to suggest that the rapid pace of technological change means that some colleagues find it difficult to keep up with either the latest innovations or best practice in effective online learning design. There was some weariness of what some see as interventionist moves in the direction of HE standardization through managerialism audit and a resulting loss of academic autonomy. More fundamentally, the interviews revealed uncertainty about the pedagogical benefits of digital tools and resources delivered through VLEs such as Moodle. For many of those interviewed. Instead of enhancing learning such such tools may have a detrimental effect in areas such as attendance and class study skills acquisition and engagement with subject content. So equally my widespread amongst the interviewees was the belief that digital technologies and less less naturally suited to arts and humanities disciplines. So some of the skepticism was undoubtedly fueled by belief in the intrinsic superiority of printed books over electronic material. So this view is epitome is epitomized in the wider literature by Birkitt's claim. So this is from 2009. The book readers learn more because the book is a system that evolved over centuries in ways that map our collective endeavor to understand and express our world while the electronic book on the other hand represents some functions as a circuitry of instant access. So one of the main concerns is the impact that digital technologies having on what staff consider to be the signature pedagogy of arts and humanities teaching close reading and the role it plays in developing student criticality. So a common view shared by the interviewees is that the Internet is a harbinger of poor academic practice practices such as skim reading and surface level learning. This they argue is to the detriment of their programs and militates against the development of student criticality. In terms of writing skills that was also expressed about the affordances of online tools such as discussion forums as a space to foster collaborative discussion debate and written reflection using an appropriate academic register. Okay, so so in an attempt to address at least some of my colleagues concerns as part of this role as digital learning director for the Faculty of Arts, I set up the Moodle redesign initiative. So it was designed as a cost effective on demand contextualized consult consultancy service to support the review redesign of online learning content delivered through the institutional VLE in ways that are both consistent with the pedagogical values of arts and humanities scholars and the line to wider institutional strategic objectives. So much of the redesign work was carried out by a team of PhD students completing doctoral studies in areas such as translation studies, classics and American and Canadian studies. So after receiving pedagogical and technical training, the students worked with an academic member of staff that had requested help to redesign one or more of their modules. This project that as I said was underpinned by the phenomenological research findings was resorted was awarded research project of the year. In the 2020 learning technologist of the year awards. I think the key thing is that it came out the project that the way in which we organize the project is goals came out of that phenomenological research that we did previously with the academics. Okay, so so that brings us to the question of audience, which is a key theme in arts and humanities research or in our case, our audience is made up of our students. So, can we in the same way, as in the case of the moodle redesign initiative, use phenomenological research methods to explore students lived experience of online teaching and learning, and use the results as the basis for developing practical solutions that address their needs. So, at the alt conference earlier this month. I use such an approach to explore arts and humanities students experiences of online learning during the pandemic. This revealed a number of interesting insights. So regarding the positive aspects of their experience students identified, firstly, the flexibility and convenience of the teaching and learning arrangements during the pandemic. They're very positive about the online provision of lecture recordings. Also about the support for learning they received with students fall some in their praise for staff who have gone above and beyond in terms of the support they provided. This was particularly during the early stages of the pandemic. There are reports of positive experiences of both asynchronous and synchronous mode of lecture delivery. So, while the former was valued for catch up purposes live sessions were reported as more interactive and engaging. Of course, there are also several negative experiences reported by students. So that's poor connectivity and a lack of bandwidth, including in on on campus student accommodation. As expected, communication isolation and mental health are identified as of concern. Regarding peer to peer discussion and collaboration using breakout rooms. Some students seem to have enjoyed the opportunity for discussion that such technologies provide. Others were more critical claiming they derived very little benefit from such interactions. Big issue workload and other time related issues so students often commented that it takes more time to watch take notes and reflect on pre recorded lectures, and it does to attend live lectures delivered through Microsoft teams. The other main issue in this regard concerns the timeliness of recording availability with some students stating that insufficient time to watch videos before attending timetabled online classes. Interestingly, a final issue flagged in feedback from students concerns high flex teaching. So, and that I would say received mixed reviews. Some students quite positive others were more more negative in their comments. So, one of the main criticisms of student feedback initiatives concerns universities failure to deliver to deliver a change in response to it. So, such inability to close the loop can be a source of student frustration is often cited as one of the reasons for their low response rates to surveys and other forms of consultation. So, where action is taken. It's often perfunctory, resulting in little more than cosmetic change. So again, from an, from an arts and humanities perspective. What can we do to address this. So, in this paper and in the, in the paper of the New York conference. I argue that we could do worse than take inspiration from the romantic poets. So, while romanticism and online learning design may seem like unlikely bedfellows. Imagination as in the work of Keats, Coleridge and Shelley and in poems, such as the auguries of innocence by Blake, in which he says to see a world in a grain of sand and heaven in a wild flower, holding infinity in the palm of your hand and eternity in an hour. It's an important tool in the online course designers toolbar. So, in your paper, I set out the concept of future pedagogical imaginaries, which I argued can be used as heuristic tools to imagine the future. They are particularly valuable in periods of uncertainty, such as at the moment in the context of the ongoing pandemic, when it's unclear which pedagogical strategy is best to follow. Opening up new imaginative horizons imaginaries can kick kick start discussions about pedagogical innovation amongst staff and students and provide templates to inform curriculum development. In order to be cut imaginaries can also act performatively a self fulfilling prophecies shaping the decisions that create the outcomes the imaginaries predict. So to be plausible, they need to be rooted in the present in body empirical trends and constitute to significant departure from prevailing practices structures and technologies. So, in the paper. I'm not going to go. I'm not going to set them out here but in the paper. I fleshed out three future pedagogical imaginaries. So, one based on a flip model, another on a more standard blended learning approach and another based on high flex delivery. So, these I argued can be used heuristically the models that the imaginaries by colleagues, they work their way through the pandemic and out the other side. So the imaginaries act as creative tools, the kickstart debates underpin experimentation and inform pedagogical planning and design and should not be seen as rigid model models. In each imaginary delivery is flexible. Either timetable elements can be moved seamlessly between in person and online delivery using video conferencing platforms such as Microsoft teams and zoom. Finally, I signal that the imaginaries are not in competition. It's perfectly feasible for them to peacefully coexist within the same teaching context. And neither should they be seen as filling the whole realm of the pedagogically possible. Finally, and crucially, each of them incorporated a focus on student concerns revealed through the femme phenomenological research. In the context of pyflex, which is currently, it seems a fairly hot topic of debate across the sector. I concluded by saying that while currently not that popular with staff and students, it does provide for considerable flexibility, which is important. And so which is considered important by students. And I would also say shouldn't be underestimated in the current context. So as a consequence, rather than rejecting the strategy, the strategy out of hand, it's important to invest time and energy in exploring its affordances and constraints, as well as the learning spaces and technologies required to deliver effectively. We cannot escape the fact that some students, whether because of their location, circumstances or through choice, will not be able to attend on campus events. In such circumstances, there may be considerable value at least for some department schools and faculties in evolving to become work and study from anywhere operations. So to do so requires teaching rooms equipped with the latest technologies and staff with the confidence, skills of flexibility to reimagine their teaching for a content, for a context in which students are on campus and that remote locations at the same time. Okay, so that brings us to the conclusions. So in this class, I set out to demonstrate the analytical and practical value of arts and humanities thinking to the practice of online blended learning design. So I began by exploring ontological questions. This led to the conclusion that learning design is a complex process that integrates material, human, socially constructed dimensions. In reality, I set out 10 potential affordances, the apps, platforms, tools and media that learning designers can exploit different ways to support student learning. I explained that from an arts and humanities perspective, the key focus is on the human dimension as it is the designers, knowledge, skills, beliefs, attitudes and mindset that marshal the pedagogical affordances and potentialities of digital technologies and not the technologies per se. I then demonstrated how we can analyze the different dimensions of online courses, both empirically and speculatively by using methods commonly associated with the arts and humanities, such as content and discourse analysis and phenomenology. In terms of the human dimension, I showed how phenomenological methods were useful in my own case for investigating why so often there's been a failure to exploit the potential of the digital tools, platforms and applications at our disposal to create aesthetically pleasing online learning spaces that are effective for triggering interaction. So the findings of this research have been used to underpin a practical initiative, the Moodle redesign project that focused explicitly on trying to manage the contradictions and tensions that were revealed by exploring colleagues' beliefs and attitudes to online learning. I also demonstrated how qualitative methods can be used to interrogate students' experiences of online learning, this time in the context of the pandemic. Again, I demonstrated through the concept of future pedagogical imaginaries how we can use such research practically to create heuristic tools that help us think creatively and productively about teaching and learning, possibly not just in the arts and humanities, but in all subject areas. Finally, I tried to show at least that by thinking carefully about communication and the language of online courses, we can construct narratives that draw on the experience of effective practice in other sectors, such as social media, to inspire and persuade students to engage in activity beneficial for learning, such as contributing regularly to online discussions, as in the discussion board example I set out earlier. In this respect, instead of as courses, we might think of our designs as persuasive arguments that as Richard Buchanan argues, come to life whenever a user considers or uses a product as a means to some end, such as in our case, to acquire new knowledge, skills and behaviors. Okay, so that's anybody does have. No, there's a couple of questions that have come up in the comments if you wanted to have a look in there or I'm happy to read them out for you. Yeah, sure. The first one was from Simon earlier and he said, shouldn't we be cautious in our use of humor, especially with distance and EAL students where the nuances could be missed. Yeah, no, I think that's a very good point. Yeah, no, yeah, I think that's a good point and something I think it's important to bear in mind. You're absolutely right. But I think the wider point that I was making that we that we can use language rhetorically to trigger action or behaviors, student behaviors, I do think is an important one. And I think one that we're possibly not exploiting to the full at the moment, particularly in the types of context I'm interested in. I think in MOOCs, you see this, this greater focus on language and, as I said, how you can sway students to engage with the learning content. But I don't think you see it very much in undergraduate in the online dimension of undergraduate modules. But I do think that's a good point yet. Absolutely take that point. There's another question from Florence and using something like hypothesis or per usual ideal for close reading social reading collaboration and critical writing. Perhaps an issue here is that humanity lecturers are not well informed about tools that support the signature pedagogies of the humanities. No, absolutely. I absolutely agree. I mean, I disagree with some of the, well, many of the arguments that were revealed through the phenomenological research that we conducted with colleagues, but I do think that they're fairly widespread. And so, I think what that means is we have to focus significant attention on the kind of the human resource dimension of online learning design. So, so a lot of work still needs to be done to, I think, kind of change mindsets attitudes. And one way of doing that is, is I suppose by by demonstrating how these different tools and resources can be be used effectively in arts and humanities context for, for example, developing close reading skills. I do think that discussion for forums if used effectively have a very positive impact on on on the development of students academic writing skills. So we've got one more question. Maria's asked, do you think that there is a future for arts and humanities, or will they just be a preserve of a handful of prestigious HE institutions? Well, I hope so. Otherwise I'll be out of a job. Yeah, I do. But I do think, you know, I think that the one way in which we can guarantee its future is demonstrating how the types of arts and humanities thinking that I've, I've set out here. I mean, doesn't just have a kind of analytical purpose purposes but but but also practical purposes as well. So, so what I very much try to do is, is ensure that the results of any research that I've done have underpin kind of practical solutions to the problems that they that that research has revealed. So, so yeah, absolutely. I do think there is a future. But we might have to persuade. We might have to. Yeah, I think, as I said, I think that think obviously things like, like this in which we, you know, we set out some of the practical applications of arts and humanities thinking, you know, I think, I think is really important. Thank you. I think that's the last question unless anyone else wants to pop in and say anything before we finish. So I said, thank you now for provoking talk as usual. Thanks. I'm going to end the recording there now because it doesn't seem we have any more questions, but thank you for joining us. It's been really interesting session.