I haven’t read a lot of research in the area of culture and instructional design – especially integration. Here’s a good one.

Patricia Young, Ph.D. did a literature review on the topic of  integrating culture in the design of information and communication technologies (ICTs). The definition of culture used in the article is from Geert Hofstede:

Culture is the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the member of one human group from those of another. Culture in this sense is a system of collectively held values.

Young notes that “in ID, definition of culture are more broadly based to include sociological, anthropological, and educational perspectives.” She writes about integrating culture in design through internationalization (eliminate culture; homogenous technological product that is usable across cultures) and localization (specialize; make acceptable to target group).

One “model of culture” she mentions is Hofstede’s five dimensions:

• Power, distance
• Uncertainty avoidance
• Masculinity-femininity
• Individualism-collectivism
• Time orientation

Methods to integrate culture in the design of ICTs are cultural variation (design specification to accommodate for variations in learners, characteristics of learners and the tasks for learning and content – like the use of graphic symbols vs. text) and cultural research (describing the target audience in terms of learning strategies and contexts for learning, e.g. humor).

Young suggests that the design has not caught up with technology and that the future of integration in design lies in changing mindsets first and design practices second.

To follow Young’s work in this area, refer to her website about her future book here.  The book describes a framework to integrate culture in design.

The Culture Based Model (CBM) is an intercultural instructional design framework that guides designers through the design, development, management and assessment process. This model works in constructing custom development, adding on to existing designs, re-engineering off-the-shelf products, and providing diagnostic evaluations. CBM has 8 areas consistent with the acronym: ID-TABLET. These areas include Inquiry, Development, Team, Assessments, Brainstorming, Learners, Elements and Training. CBM’s ID-TABLET focuses on project management and project design. The areas under project management include: Brainstorming, Team, Development, Learners, Assessments, and Training. The project design focuses on monitoring and content development. The areas under project design include: Inquiry and Elements. These areas operate simultaneously and maintain an interactive relation. As a model that seeks to meet culture based design decisions, CBM is a comprehensive tool for the design process.

Young, P. (2008) Integrating Culture in the Design of ICTs, British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 39 No 1 p. 6-17.

Continuing on a theme…

I’ve botched some projects. Not badly but enough to slow something down. Under the big umbrella of ‘culture’ the missteps were the result of the failure to recognize (or the denial of the existence of) the little components.

Little things that make projects fail…

Failure to address the “we don’t do it that way” issue.

One option is to try to find companies that do “do it that way” successfully (ideally within a vertical market) and share that information (everyone is interested in what the competition is doing better). Early adopters are few. New things scare the heck out of many people. Don’t look like the first one to try something. And don’t reinvent the wheel.

Failure to recognize potential turf wars/personality issues.

You can starting fixing this anticipated down-the-road problem by drafting a flowchart for the project and identifying everyone you’ll likely deal with along the way. This means everyone not just the “stakeholders.” Are there people that should be ‘red flagged’ as possible bottlenecks?

(Note: don’t actually use a red flag on your chart. I’d go with “KA” – ‘known asshole’ to you, to others “Key Asset” or “Knowledge Area” or something).

Only you know how best to deal with that person – you might need to get them involved earlier, have a direct conversation with them (nothing like that face-to-face conversation vs. email is there?) about what you’re trying to do and why it’s important, involve their manager in a good way so when you need support you’ll likely already have it, provide them with a reason they are crucial, or explain the performance objective it is tied to.

I think our natural reaction is to just brace ourselves for the turf war we anticipate rather than dealing with it initially.

Maybe it’ll be different this time…or maybe pigs will fly…

Turf wars are about fear, control, and protection of assets. This includes fear of becoming obsolete, acknowledging someone has a better idea, fear of giving up ownership, fear of missed goals.

Other details to think about:

Anticipate fears about change

“we’ve always done it that way,” “if it’s not broke, don’t fix it,”

How will you deal with that? What is your planned response?

Deal with the

“if we allow you do it for you, we’ll have allow everyone to do it”

by piloting something first. This wasn’t fun as in high school either was it? Either find someone who is doing it or make your case for why it is better than something you are currently doing. Also, by suggesting someone is a bottleneckand offering them a way out (pilot!), you’ll likely get beyond this juvenile, “large paint roller” response.

It won’t work because…you know this person…but will it work? What’s your good answer?

Not this: Well, John they didn’t think the chalkboard would work out either but it kind of did…here’s why I think this will work because….
or this: How’s that horse and buggy thing working out?

Not my job

I do widgets. Widget is all I do. I don’t do gadgets. Gadgets are done by the person across the hall. If it’s quicker and not a huge deal, learn how to do the gadgets yourself. If not, suggest outsourcing and I’m sure the widget-maker will try to become a gadget-maker pretty quick. Or, worst case…you actually outsource gadget-making.

Not following the ‘proper’ channels

Ever get the email responses that have more and more cc’s with each response? In a command-and-control environment, this (to me) was a sign of not “getting the right people involved.” Everbody starts weighing in and asking/answering questions that should have been asked already. I think ideas starts in the white space of the org chart and work their way up without jumping channels in this kind of environment. Learn & remember the game rules.

Like Monopoly: You can’t collect $200 unless you pass GO.

Not giving yourself enough time/thinking you can ‘do it all’ yourself/not having a project manager

Guilty? This is a quick way to sabotage your own project. By laying out a path for completion, and updating it, you can properly anticipate and handle the details.

Training is equally as important as every other initiative!

Warning: this post is full of digressions, contradictions, and tangents. (I’m just saying…)

I read an older Pew Publication recently on the behavior and traits of 18-25-year-old U.S. Americans (born 1981 and 1988) for some research I’m currenly doing on “generational learning styles” (don’t get me going on that – I’m a mess about it!). Although the report is a year old, I don’t think much has changed in the past year as far as this study goes.

Interesting when I look at these findings based on my own experiences as an 18-25 year old American in 1982-1987 (although some of what I remember is probably blocked out, lost due to blacking out, or forgotten entirely). To give you context, I was born on the same day and year as Kirk Hammett, from Metallica. I’m part of the Generation Jones – between the X’s and the boomers or, as I like to call it, the Marcia, Marcia, Marcia generation.

Here’s Generation Next, the subject of the study:

• Half send or receive text message over the phone daily (double 26-40-year olds). [My text messages were written on paper and roughly said, "I'll be home at dark" (for my parents) or (for my friends/enemies) were passed in class or left in lockers. I frequently used emoticons on my actual face - the one-eyebrow-up was my hallmark. I would say half of my generation used 'text messaging' with the technology known as a pen.]
• Four-in-ten have created personal profiles on social networking sites. [My social network site was the bottom of the driveway where I hung out with neighborhood friends. Nobody's parents would take us anywhere and they didn't want us in the house either. The information I shared with my friends then was similar to the open-book information I now display for the world. So only 8-10 people listened to my inane crap then and now slightly more. Suckas.]
• Eight-in-ten say new technology makes people lazier. I had to hide to be lazy. If I was caught lazing around, I was given a job to do. Technology was a clothespin out on the clothesline. I’m reminded of a recent conversation with my 20 year-old nephew and his suggestion that he thought technology would take us to the point where we did not need arms or legs. Not that he didn’t want arms and legs, but that he wanted to live in a world where he didn’t have to use them if he didn’t want to. I have agreed that the new technology of my generation – the dryer – made people lazier.]
• Half say immigrants to the U.S. strengthen the country. [I am a first generation Scottish-American. My parents are immigrants so I can''t really comment on this other than to say I believe it is true - then and now. Plus then, I would've gotten smacked on the side of the head if I didn't think it was true. My own kids today get a lot more information on diversity in general.]
• Are generally less critical (and less cynical) of government regulation and business. [I speak cynicism fluently as do many friends my age and many of my kids friends. Workin' for the man. Workin' for the man. 18 or 40 we're all workin' for the man. Only the super-cyncial admit to being cynical in a survey.]
• Are in close contact with their parents. [See first bullet point “ I'll be home at dark." This is an interesting dynamic. We've probably all read stories about the helicopter parent who called their kid's boss at work to question a poor performance review. I'm not sure what, if any, impact this has on workplace learning but I think it may. My feeling is that there is a need for greater performance support.]
• Half have gotten a tattoo, dyed their hair an untraditional color, or have body piercing on body parts other than the ear (1/3rd have tattoos). Tattoos in the 70s-80s were primarily found on the skin of those in the military, bikers (Harley style), rock stars, and those in prison. [Brian Jackson lists five reasons people get tattoos today - loved ones, religious, military service, mistake, just for fun. I'd add anger, celebration of an event, love of pain, and love of art. But this is generation "me" or generation "look at me" we're talking about so permanent markings doesn't surprise me. Does anyone else see a demand here for more laser surgeons in the future? The looming talent shortage (if you buy it) along with this trait are why conservative HR depts. scramble to update policies about appearance. No tattoos is replaced with 'only tasteful tattoos.' I'd like to be on that committee...]
• 1/3rd follow what’s going on in the government and public affairs. [I have to admit, they do a better job at this than I did. Government was a parent thing. Now kids have to get community hours to fulfill graduation requirements for high school. We only did community service if we got caught doing something illegal.]
• Twice as likely (than older generations) to name a family member, teacher, or mentor as hero. [I would've named someone famous I think. Probably some rock star. Perhaps I would've named a family member if I had been more close. The Jones Generation are a bunch of basement kids.]
• More comfortable with globalization and new ways of doing work. [I think so. I still thought then that it was good to have one, stable job. How long have you been in your current job? I don't even know what my job will look like 5 years from now.]
• Top goals: fortune and fame. [I'm reminded of a cartoon: how to be a famous blogger (1) become famous, (2) become a blogger, (3) become a famous blogger. (And, accept advertising for the fortune part.)]
• Feel that educational and job opportunities are better for them today than for the previous generations but are concerned with getting into and graduating from college. [It's not hard to get into an online college. But it often is hard to get into many f2f colleges. However, there are more and more online education opportunities every year. They are not restricted by space. I think this creates opportunities. I don't think I dared to flunk out of college because I would've gotten smacked on the side of the head again. And, lost my funding. I think my generation felt the same way - that I had better opportunities then the previous generation.]
• 86% use the Internet at least occasionally (nearly all college grads do while 77% of non-college graduates do). (Gen X=91%, Baby Boomers=73%, Seniors 46%) [I do wonder though about losing the ability to think deeply. When everything is at your fingertips, why remember? What does it mean not to have to try to remember who played Jed Clampett on the Beverly Hillbillies? Or what the heck the lyrics to Led Zeppelin's Immigrant Song were? What does that do to your brain?]

(BTW that’s Buddy Ebsen and “on we sweep with threshing oar,
Our only goal will be the western shore! Ah, ah!)

Regarding generational differences and learning, I’m really not convinced that we need to create different instructional strategies any more than we need to create different instructional strategies to address learning styles. To me, it’s an issue of individual experiences, context, and preferences.

Most people, regardless of age, want to chit chat with their friends, get a little rebellious, and share their background & interests with others. And, I think they understand that most technology might make them lazier.

While I recognize different characters and traits of a group bound by a time period in a particular part of the world, I’m not convinced generational differences mean that much when designing instruction. The fact that the net gen texts all the time so therefore needs immediate feedback doesn’t change the non-texters also might need immediate feedback. Yes, we may need to address abilities (for all learners) but I think it’s more about the need to focus on how to teach and learn. If technologies are used to make that easier and better, then we do it. In short, I’m not seeing a lot of research in this area that doesn’t suggest the entire issue of generational learning styles is hype.

I know only fellow 40+ers have hung in to the end of this post. There weren’t enough pictures for the 18 year olds ; )

You know how they are…

I posted a comment (see below) on Elliot Masie’s temporary blog Classroom of the Future. Elliot’s question: “If you were to design a brand new type of classroom for your organization, what would it contain?”

What is the bedroom of the future? What is the bathroom of the future? Each has “stuff” in it designed for a specific purpose. The bed of straw becomes a bed that forms to your body and is fully adjustable the stuff in the room becomes smarter. The outhouse becomes high-tech and is equipped with a combination portable music player and toilet paper dispenser and has heated seats. But none of this stuff changes the purpose of the room.

Historically, the room in which classes are held has been a room with more and better stuff in it. We started with chairs, desks, and a chalkboard and now see smartboards, videoconferencing, interactive devices, LCDs, etc. But it doesn’t change the purpose of the room – to provide a physical space where learning can take place.

Perhaps the toilet of the future is not a toilet at all. Perhaps the green movement will lead to innovations that make the toilet obsolete. Will we say, “remember when we needed all that plumbing?” And maybe the classroom of the future is not a room at all. Will we say, “remember when we all went to a room to be trained?”

It seems to me we are returning to the way we used to learn – out in the open world but with more, and different stuff.

My question: Do we need to provide a physical space where learning can take place?

What work I have done I have done because it has been play. If it had been work I shouldn’t have done it.
-Mark Twain

Employment is very quid pro quo. This work for that cash. Blackmail some might say. You hope to find or create a paying gig that involves more ‘play’ than ‘work’. Something you love and are passionate about.

I suspect play is not a word many organizations would use to describe the ‘work’ their employees do and, not a word many employees would use to describe what they do for pay. When we work, we are moving toward something – finishing it, moving it along to the next step. When we play we use our imaginations and aren’t concerned with outcome. But we hear, say, think…

• Stop playing around and get back to work!
• I’ve got to stop playing with this software and get back to work…
• Or one of the worst cultural rock climbs…what are you doing…playing a game? (why we call it “serious” gaming?)
• Maybe even…I’ve got to stop blogging and get some work done.

When it comes to educational/developmental blogging inside an organization, I suspect it’s viewed mostly as play. It’s not ‘real work.’ How many corporate employees (who are not writers or professional bloggers or corporate bloggers) get paid to consistently write and reflect at work? Consultants foot the bill but use their blog to build business. Some bloggers monetize to gain a source of income. Who pays you to read this? How many employers wouldn’t want employees who can reason critically and think deeply? Wouldn’t they pay for that?

The collaborative nature of blogging leads to critical reasoning and deep thinking – skills that may be in short supply with answers always at your fingertips via Google or Wikipedia. Think of some of the innovative ideas you’ve been exposed to by reading/writing blog posts or how reading something may have caused you the think, reflect, gain knowledge, and perhaps even change your mind. Emerging theories like connectivism, new ways to connect through social networks, educating in virtual worlds, etc. are all the stuff of blogs.

How do we incorporate blogging in the workplace? How do we get at the deeper thinking-type skills? For starters, let’s try not to call it blogging. Let’s look at usage.

The matrix below by Scott Leslie was referenced by Stephen Downes in a older article on E-Learning 2.0. Perhaps to get at the critical reasoning, deep thinking, and collaborative ‘play’ we need, we say instead that we need an easy way to keep project teams collaborating, to share knowlege about the department, to share expertise. Instead of saying we need to be able to blog we say we need this for whatever we’re actually using it for.

(Click image to make larger)

If you’re trying to think of ways to illustrate and sell the whole 2.0 thing at your 1.0 organization, this “Meet Charlotte” slideshow from The Shed might do the trick. It’s downloadable from SlideShare. And, it looks like the nice folks at The Shed will let you customize it so long as you link back to the original. Nice.

[added after original post because I was blind enough to not attribute to the original creator : ( ]
The original inspiration for this style of presentation was “Meet Henry” from Ethos3 which officially reached cult status.

The popular” Meet Charlie” slide presentation by Scott Gavin, using the Ethos3 model is also excellent.

I’ve created one (below) for learning 2.0 reusing content from The Shed . You are welcome to use it/improve it but please attribute it to me, The Shed, and don’t forget the original creators at Ethos2.

| View | Upload your own

I stumbled across two articles that really resonated with me. Here and here. The latter of those two articles, from GIBS review, has a great quote about art and business that, I think, can be applied to educational blogging.

“The arts discipline is emerging as a role model for business.
Writing, reflecting, collaborating,…it’s an art and it can lead to great innovations.”

As I talk to those in corporate training I sense that educational blogging – writing (and expressing ideas in other forms), reflecting, and collaborating – is not taken too seriously. It’s a hard sell – both to employers and employees. Generally employers don’t pay people to write and reflect and employees can’t envision writing and reflecting about their work. ‘What should I write? they’ll ask.

I can probably track down  many companies that are having great success with educational blogging – this art of writing, reflecting, and collaborating – but it’s not mainstream by a long shot. Why? Maybe this….

Skills that utilise intuition, inspiration and active imagination haven’t found a home within the corporate world. “Many employees have equally separated their love of creativity and the arts, and a chasm exists between their right and left brains.

Aah…this stirs up that oft cited concept that children are more imaginative, more artistic, than adults. True? An older position paper, “The Child’s Right to Creative Thought and Expression,” for the Association for Childhood Education International (ACEI) by Mary Renck Jalongo, says:

To be imaginative means that a person formulates rich and varied mental images, sees beyond the obvious, and draws upon experience in inventive and effective ways.

Adults may have the advantage when it comes to storing and retrieving information, drawing upon experience, and making judgments about what is appropriate and effective. Fishkin (1998) uses the term “germinal creativity” as a preferred descriptor for budding creativity in children. While germinal creativity produces unique ideas, the child may not yet have the ability to execute them well or communicate them clearly to others.

Why pursue writing, reflection, and collaborative learning in the workplace? In a word: innovation. An article in the GIBS review, The Art of Work is a great read that helps answer that question.

Art clearly stimulates and preserves business. It therefore makes sense for business to stimulate and preserve art. Art embodies diverse interpretations of how we see the world. It opens our minds, tempts creativity and inspires new ideas.

It’s the collaboration/innovation link that resonates most with me. I would not write here in this space if not for the collaborative nature of the conversation, the creative and diverse opinions of the community, and the support.

In the past, in the present, and in the future, our most enlightened visions of education will be connected by the common thread of imagination, creative thought, and enhanced opportunities for creative expression. As we look ahead, it will no doubt be possible to trace society’s greatest innovations and achievements back to an abiding respect for creative thought processes during childhood. For when we value creative thinking and creative expression in society, it becomes part of our social consciousness and social capital. Society then protects its reserves of creativity by fashioning networks of support that are capable of instilling confidence, promoting resilience, and multiplying ways of being intelligent in every person, commencing in childhood and continuing throughout the lifespan.

In the GIBS article, Linda Naiman believes “with an increased focus on the arts, corporations can overcome many major obstacles, including diversity, cross-group collaboration, and work/life balance.” She also says:

A shared art experience in an environment of trust and freedom enhances our sense of belonging and creates a crucible for deep conversation from which caring, camaraderie and genius-level thinking emerge.

I like Naiman’s description of the process mining group gold.I certainly have witnessed some genius-level thinking in the little group some of us refer to as the edublogosphere. And I’m grateful.

How many times have you heard (or said, or thought) that?

I’m saying it to myself right now. See, I am in the process of moving. The last time I moved was 1999. We had a 60-day lapse in between closings on our homes back then and had to go into a rental. That involves moving twice in the course of two months.

I’m doing it again. This time with a 6-week lapse. A family of five & a household with eight years worth of ‘stuff.’ I’m asking myself why.

Not WHY in the ‘Sponge-Bob Squarepants to Patrick Starfish-way (the one when their balloon bursts) but WHY in the ‘Tom Hanks-to-Wilson the Volleyball-way (when their sail breaks off their homemade lifeboat). You know, I DON’T KNOW WHY!!!

Please tell me you do that too. Exhausted, do you look at yourself in the mirror and say WHY? It’s amusing because it’s mostly done after you’ve already done whatever it is you’ve always done stupidly. “Why didn’t I just…Why do I always…WHY?

Here’s an old story I’m sure you’ve read before…(via businessballs.com)

Apparently this is based on a true incident. A quality management consultant was visiting a small and somewhat antiquated English manufacturing company, to advise on improving general operating efficiency. The advisor was reviewing a particular daily report which dealt with aspects of productivity, absentee rates, machine failure, down-time, etc. The report was completed manually onto a photocopied proforma that was several generations away from the original master-copy, so its headings and descriptions were quite difficult to understand. The photocopied forms were particularly fuzzy at the top-right corner, where a small box had a heading that was not clear at all. The advisor was interested to note that the figure ’0′ had been written in every daily report for the past year. On questioning the members of staff who completed the report, they told him that they always put a zero in that box, and when he asked them why they looked at each other blankly. “Hmmm.., I’m not sure about that,” they each said, “I guess we’ve just always done it that way.”

Intrigued, the consultant visited the archives to see if he could find a clearer form, to discover what was originally being reported and whether it actually held any significance. When he found the old reports, he saw that the zero return had continued uninterrupted for as far back as the records extended – at least the past thirty years – but none of the forms was any clearer than those presently in use. A little frustrated, he packed away the old papers and turned to leave the room, but something caught his eye. In another box he noticed a folder, promisingly titled ‘master forms’. Sure enough inside it he found the original daily report proforma master-copy, in pristine condition. In the top right corner was the mysterious box, with the heading clearly shown …… ‘Number of Air Raids Today’.

Yup. Patterns are a scary thing.

Make two columns and keep track of your patterns over the next week. Label one side ‘innovative’ and one side ‘stupid’ and see if you can break some unproductive, recurring, unoriginal habits. I’m going to give it a go.

I’m a pretty typical suburban U.S. mother – a soccer Mom a/k/a “hockey Mom” of the minivan variety (read: boring vs. the sexy/gas-guzzly SUV variety). I limit my three kids to no more than two activities a ‘season.’ So right now we’re into the seven-month (ice) hockey season, short indoor lacrosse and indoor soccer seasons which carry over into the outdoor season, year-round ballet, and school year-long music lessons (what seasons?). Many are critical of this, even my own parents who become ‘exhausted’ when reading the schedule.Â

I’ve written about hockey before because it’s one of my favorite sports. Our youth hockey organization has a great group of parents I enjoy being around. Not so in many other organizations. Last year at a neighboring rink, some fans got into a fight and one ended up with a head injury in the hospital. This is youth hockey. Not the NY Rangers.

This is probably why hockey is the only sport where I have to watch a mandatory training video on how not to be a jerk.

I got thinking about why hockey is different – why it requires anti-jerk training. I think it’s probably due to violence-driven litigation at the youth level and the draw associated with the (condoned/’enforcer’-type) player fighting associated with the sport at the professional level. You know, the “I was at a fight and a hockey game broke out…”

It reminds me of mandatory compliance-type training that speaks to our common sense. We might just as well align our ‘common-sense’ compliance training with the adult education program (“relax, it’s just a game) in hockey.

“Relax, it’s just a password video or “Oops don’t get us sued” e-learning. Training for the masses based on the actions of a few. Ugh.

Meanwhile, I only screamed once or twice during the four games I attended this tournament weekend. Mostly just “skate Drew skate!” as he chased after a breakaway (he’s a defenseman). Better take the mandatory training again. Ugh

Photos: Mom from this Mom t-shirt shopand harassment from this law firm. Gotta love the irony.

My feet are killing me! Working at home, I never wear heels so I am just not used to it. However, being a woman of very short stature, I always wear heels when traveling or attending a business function. Does it matter that one is 5′? What a riot, right? Like 5′ 3″ is an Amazon woman or something. Did I say ouch?

Anyway, I just finished co-facilitating a workshop in Davidson, North Carolina at Ingersoll Rand with my colleague Gary Woodill. We had a group of twenty (perfect I think) for a highly hands-on workshop. Ingersoll Rand University supplied everyone with laptops and loaded them up with many of the no-no’s of corporate America  Skype, Facebook, SecondLife, Blog and Wiki software, etc. As with high-heeled shoes, it’s easy to forget the discomfort of firewalls.

The last time I used a wiki at a workshop I failed to populate it with anything. I expected people to just show up and start partying. I mean *hello* who would come to a dead party? This time, I think I did a better job. I’m not sure why I think training folks are any different when it comes to learning how to use new tools. We need to provide context and reasons other than “collaborate.” All attendees got their own page to take notes and the entire agenda and all necessary materials were there – cocktail franks and all. We had a end-of-session contest and, as a facilitator, it was gratifying to see the wikis used in unique ways and one attendee spent the evening setting one up for his workplace. Suh-weet!

Blogging worked. Instead of taking an hour to get everyone set up with their own blog and then trying to pull them back into the conversation when they just want to write, I live blogged an activity on a big screen as they were presenting it and then they commented (nearly ALL hadn’t done that before and didn’t use a reader). When we returned from a break, someone outside the group had picked up the post and it provided a good example of how blogs connect people.

Of course the real reason the workshop went well was because the attendees rocked, Gary Woodill rocked, and Ingersoll Rand rocked!

I must publicly thank my new friend Charlotte Coyle of Ingersoll Rand University (along with the IT staff and Lynn Palefsky) for managing this event for us and hosting us at their state-of-the-art facility. The North Carolina-style barbeque we all had for lunch was a killer ending. When I finally get home, I’ll be dreaming of Crocs and Uggs, open access, and will be hoping for a chance to go back to Charlotte soon.