I definitely think we got some good work today, you know, focusing on, you know, just being able to play fast and being able to do our two minute stuff. So yeah, I think we took a step in the right direction today versus yesterday in terms of our energy coming out. You guys hit the mentality for new change? It doesn't change, you know, it's still taking every day, you know, one day at a time. You know, the game is, I'm excited for it, obviously, but I just can't keep looking too far ahead. Just got to keep taking it second one day at a time. How do you feel, OTA is and all that, so how do you feel like it's going now that you're here and available all the day? Yeah, it's definitely, you know, just like I said, it's just a one day at a time thing, you know, you just got to keep making plays when he throws you the ball so he can trust you. You got to make sure you know your stuff in terms of the playbook and make sure you know how you get lined up. Make sure you just do all the little things right.  And that's when the trust really gets there. Feeling comfortable? Yeah, feeling comfortable. Definitely feeling comfortable. A lot more comfortable now.  Do I ever make the same mistake twice? That's our motto. So definitely going in the right direction. I know you're talking about this before. Just, you know, we're very physical. I'm a physical dude, big body that can move. So I'm definitely like gives something in that aspect, you know, someone who can come in and block and then also be able to win on those safeties, linebackers, nickels, this type of bodies. Definitely route routes. He's very efficient. We're getting out of his breaks. He knows how to set guys up.  So it's definitely one thing I'm trying to learn from him throughout this training camp. It's definitely kind of a great gene come true ever since I was at TSU. You know, I'm always talking about, you know, getting the opportunity to play here in Nashville, this second home to me. So now that it's come true, I'm going to, you know, take full advantage of it. And yeah, I'm thankful to be here. Everybody was excited, you know, they were wishing me the best. They were saying that's like something, yeah, we've been talking about since I've been at TSU. So for it to actually come true now is, you know, it's crazy and I'm thankful for it. I was really, today was honestly my first day getting in the fire, but, you know, everything's moving fast. I'm catching up on the playbook, but I feel like after, you know, another day or two, I'll be caught up with the guys. And yeah, keep my momentum going. 10, yeah, I played the full 10 season. Yeah, it did.  So I'm in good condition and I'm, you know, I'm ready to go. Oh, it's been great. We got a young group of guys in the cornerback room, but they are hungry. They are competing in, you know, I'm in there with them now, so I'm going to compete with those guys. A lot of technique things, you know, getting in and out routes, just catching the ball. That's what it is. What's it more like? Definitely quick out of the breaks, less steps getting in and out breaks. That's what it is to me, you know. I was taking, you know, a couple more steps than I should have been taking, but now I'm, you know, snapping it down, getting out as fast as being able to track the ball. Yeah, I'm way more confident than last year.  I'm moving around, being comfortable with the offense. You know, they trust in me. I'm just trying to build and make more plays. I don't know, that's up to coach, but whatever role I'm going to do my best, do the best of my ability. What are the other receivers in this group to what you can do with your skills now? I don't know, we can be put at any position. So it's just, wherever we at, we really just got to make that play, you know, right as deep ball, shut ball, no blocking, they want that out of all of us. Yeah. Yeah, I do. I just got to keep working with Ryan, you know, keep getting on that same page, keep practicing, keep making it, you know, like second nature. Craig said, first offensive, the pass interference call is on his shoulders. Yeah. And he wants you guys to be physical and then you ratchet it down based on how the officials handle it. I imagine you guys would love it.  So like you said, he'll take that first pass interference just to let him know like we got physical receivers. He'll, from now, the game, take care of itself. How much are you anticipating that first pre-season game chance to get out there and, you know, hit somebody else? Nah, for sure, I'm definitely looking forward to it. You know, it's always good, you know, once the season gets here.  KP said yesterday that he kind of expects you at this point to step up even more as a leader as he had that discussion with you or what are those conversations like?   So I just find ways, you know, to implement my way of being a leader. Overall, how dynamic do you think this secondary can be? Very dynamic, you know, we got guys that can move around, you know, guys that can play inside, guys that can play out, guys that can make plays on the ball. And that's what we want to do. We want to have guys, you know, that make plays and don't let no guys catch the ball. That's our mentality going into the season. I know it works hand in hand, but when you have the potential of this front seven, their ability to get after quarterback, how much easier potentially can that make your guys' job? It's always easy because just in the past, like for college, I've been on defense since we haven't had a great pass rush and we've seen the effect that it can have or it doesn't have. So it's always good to have a lead front seven. But at the end of the day, we got to do our job in the back end. We can't just depend on those guys. You had a pretty big play early in practice, breaking up in the past, intended to do it?  That's all it is.  And you guys have played together in college, right? Sit again? Oh, yeah, yeah. What's it like to go up against them again? Oh, it's always good, you know, we do a little tribes talking. We were actually roommates. So we got a good relationship, but we know once we're on the field, you know, it's all compete, you know, and we just trying to make each other better.


The self-development game can be a very serious business, talking about stopping wasting time and using our time more usefully, getting serious, getting your life together, stopping wasting time with just idle pursuits. It's all generally quite serious stuff and often a lot of the things that are fun are things that when you get into self-development and making your life better you have to kind of train yourself to avoid things that you find fun. But of course this can be taken way too far. And being overall deeply serious as a fundamental disposition, we can be serious about life as our basic attitude and yet there has to be a level of playfulness. There has to be a certain lightness, a flexibility that gives a kind of fluidity to it. Being overly serious is like a brittleness, like being a hard and inflexible structure that if it is stressed it can just shatter. Whereas having a sense of playfulness and a good sense of humor is like having this kind of fluid and flexible structure that is able to withstand adversity and bounce back. So it is a balance of course. Of course taking playfulness too far would be simply wasting time and not doing focused useful work and simply becoming weaker and losing our energy. But a certain amount of playfulness makes everything better. Now I realized this last week, oh and by the way right now I'm playing with this, I have this prism that in my window that is making a rainbow and it's now right on my face. So these kind of you know playfulness sometimes these little things, a little bit of playfulness goes a long way. So last week, before last weekend I had had a bit of a phase of being very serious and then I had that night where I started listening to music and dancing around and just kind of loosening up and I realized how this is kind of awakened a sense of playfulness and I noticed how it affected me in other ways as well. When I like to run in the park, the high park near where I live and as part of my route that I like that does a nice circuit through the park it goes through an off leash dog area where dogs are allowed to run free. And I do this because it just happens to be a very nice route through the woods and making a nice circuit. But always when I used to run there I would be annoyed by these dogs that would run across my path you know forcing me to either run into them or change direction. Sometimes the dogs would start jumping on me and I generally found this annoying and I would you know just sort of kind of internally grumble at you know what's with all these dogs you know who needs these dogs. They're interfering and their human owners are letting them run free with no control and they're interfering with my run here. So that's clearly a very serious and kind of a brittle approach to that as I was annoyed. Yeah being serious makes it very easy to be annoyed. Any slight thing that goes wrong when you're deeply in an overly serious mood the slightest thing going wrong can lead to this feeling of irritation and annoyance. And so that was kind of my default state but then I noticed I had no I wasn't thinking anything differently about dogs or whatever but after that night where I listened to music and kind of loosened up and sort of reawakened this kind of playful aspect I found that as I was running in the park I didn't feel the same sense of annoyance about the dogs instead I saw these these dogs are just playing and it's not so terrible. So what if the dog runs around my feet or you know cuts me off or jumps on me and paws at me that's not really hurting me. Of course I draw the line if dog starts actually biting me but that hasn't happened and really the dogs are playing. So ever since that time now when I'm running and I see the dogs running around I don't mind at all if they start to do what I would consider to be interfering with me getting in my way and even jumping on me because this is all just dogs that are playing and I can play with them. I can see this is maybe something that dogs can be helpful that with teaching people dogs do have for the most part have a very strong sense of playfulness that if being around dogs you can certainly they'll keep reminding you of that sense of play. So now I can use this as a diagnostic if I start to become annoyed by dogs cutting me off and jumping on me that would be a sign that I'm being overly serious but if I can approach it with a spirit of play then it seems like this is a much more flexible and strong position to be in. So this is just one example of how I can see that keeping a spirit of playfulness makes life better.


helping Spanish native speakers to get motivated and confident to participate in EFL lessons. To finish the TEFL course, I would like to write on a topic that worries many EFL high school teachers in Spain, the lack of motivation, improvement, and participation of their students in the classroom. This is a topic that was widely discussed during my Master of Arts in Foreign Language Teaching. For this reason I would like to take this opportunity to do some further research on this, since I believe it's a topic of ultimate importance to all EFL teachers working in Spain. I will discuss how to solve this issue through the use of IT created to facilitate school exchanges. National Statistics Spain's Centre of Sociological Research published statistics on Spaniard's English language skills, showing that only 53% of citizens between 18 and 25 years old felt confident in their English abilities. These alarming results show the low effectiveness of teaching English in Spain's current education system. Upon completion of Spain's compulsory secondary education studies, students will have received a total of up to 800 hours of English classes. Considering this fact, it is paradoxical that students do not have a real communication level by the end of their studies. The results are even more alarming if we compare the level of English language of Spanish students to their European neighbors, according to the data provided by Education First, Spain is ranked number 19 of 27 European countries in English level. Therefore it is of great importance to think about what factors are necessary to improve teaching and learning English in Spain. Reasons of the Problem Several educators point out that the use of a teaching style is still too dependent on theoretical contents and old methodologies. This is the main cause of failure in the English classroom. This inevitably makes students have low motivation, participation, and confidence. Moreover there is a lack of real communicative situations and deficient use of modern available resources, specifically IT resources. Student exchange program School exchanges seem to be a good focus to fight the demotivation and lack of involvement and improvement of students. Students participating in exchange programs not only enjoy real and immediate communication, but have also manifested a more open and participative attitude towards learning English. However the results of the National Electoral Institute on Young People's Mobility in the first and second cycle of mandatory education show that only 1.7% of students benefit from these exchanges. Therefore school exchanges only benefit a low percentage of students, and suppose only a temporary solution to pervasive problems. Need of New Teaching Methods For all these reasons, I believe it is of great importance to create new methodologies that offer all students the possibility of enjoying real communicative situations, in which they see firsthand the results of their language progress while enjoying the advantages of modern technology. A good proposal would be to conduct school exchanges without moving from the classroom, using IT technologies and different modern communicative tools, like Zoom or Skype is a great solution. This would require international collaborations that could motivate and benefit both students and teachers. Two different schools in two different countries could arrange Zoom or Skype sessions throughout the year, to allow their students to have speaking activities, and see their progress and the benefits of learning English. These exchanges could also be done between two subjects, English and Spanish. For instance in the English class, Spanish speakers would improve their English with native students. While in the Spanish class, Spaniards could help English speakers improve their Spanish. Do you want to teach English abroad? Take a TEFL course today. Together with these webcam sessions, teachers could create a series of projects to work on during the semester or school year, all of them involving the interaction between students of both schools. Click that button down here and click on any of the videos here on the left for more interesting teaching tips for getting certified to teach English abroad and online.


religion and world politics. Part two. When we look back at our history here in Europe, we often celebrate the romanticized version of that history and forget the import that that romanticism often cloaked. For instance, when we have films, when we read the books of Alexander Dumas, particularly the Three Musketeers, all we see are three plus one swashbuckling, sword-bearing gentlemen usually of an exquisite handsomeness. There's an evil cardinal, cardinal Richelieu lurking in the background, but the idea that France was just like this for no apparent reason is something that we never really really investigate. Now in fact, the Musketeers were part of a militarization of French society at that point in time. All of Europe was militarized. Struggle within individual countries among armed factions was a commonplace. And the idea of an all-powerful cardinal, someone who was the power behind the throne, someone whose power in fact was often greater than the power emanating from the throne, this was something which demarcated a Europe caught up in what we call the Thirty Years' War. The Thirty Years' War devastated Central Europe. Although France itself was spared mass destruction, it was militarized in order to avoid having to be plunged into the chaos that surrounded Germany in particular. And the war that lasted for thirty years was in its origin a religious war. It was a war between Catholics and Protestants. It was an attempt to establish a religious hegemony over Germany that in the end failed. And the peace treaty that arose from the struggle, what we call the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, was not really one treaty but a series of treaties that were arrived at in a very protracted laborious and really quite painful manner. But it was a treaty that was the result of a convention of all of the states in Europe. At that point in time there were several hundred states. So convening them all in a small town that was itself wracked by famine as a result of the war, housing all of the ambassadors from several hundred small countries that was Europe well before union took place, and getting them all to agree where to sit in which order, let alone how to debate and to contemplate a new Europe, was very difficult. So that the final agreement of Westphalia is celebrated as a great accomplishment. And I think that there were some half dozen central breakthroughs in international relations as a result of the Treaty of Westphalia. First of all, that peace could be possible by diplomacy, mass diplomacy, diplomacy involving representatives, ambassadors of many states. Multi-lateral diplomacy in short was to a very large extent pioneered at Westphalia. However, powerful states within the Congress that convened in Westphalia formed a concept of power. So the concept within the Congress became a feature of modern international relations which stays with us to this day. The Security Council in the United Nations is an example precisely of that. But what was really important to end the struggle between religions was the recognition that domestic policy within one state should not be the concern of other states. States had a right to practice what they wanted to within their own borders. Therefore, what you had was the recognition of what we now take for granted as sovereignty. And within the sovereignty each state was entitled to develop its own personality. So what this meant, fifthly, was that in Europe with these recognitions, with the recognition that each state could domestically achieve its own personality, the idea of trying to achieve a hegemony of one religion over another fell away so that you have for the first time the advent of a secular state system. And it being a secular state system, what Westphalia accomplished in the longer term was the liberation of thinkers to think in universal terms that were truly philosophic rather than religious. Without Westphalia, the enlightenment and the thinking that came out of that would not have been possible. The Westphalian state system, as we called it, lasted to the present day. Indeed, in his latest book, probably his last book, Henry Kissinger does a root and branch defense of the Westphalian state and its state system. But he sees the floor in the system. He sees very much the weakness in it with the advent and the rise and the growing power of states which are wedded not so much to a Westphalian secularism, but to religious principles. This is if the wicked old fox finally realizes that all his years defending states like Saudi Arabia might now come home to roost. Kissinger's book was written before the advent of what we now call Islamic state, which we will consider at a later point in these lectures. But it also was a book written almost nostalgically for states that tried to be Westphalian and to a large extent failed because of Western interference. The 20th century was noteworthy for the advent of states that arose not only out of colonialism, but states that arose out of the defeat after World War One of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire had a very strong religious character and Islamic character. Its defeat meant Islam almost to an extent calcified at that moment in time. Sharia law, for instance, stopped developing after the Ottomans were defeated because there was no longer a state propagation of jurisprudential debate along Islamic lines. The defeat of the Ottomans meant the advent of many new states that had previously been part of an empire. What was left of the Ottomans tried to regroup itself into a much smaller entity called Turkey. An Ataturk who led the Turks to a recognized independence within the Westphalian state system, 1923, had to do it in the face of having to make great concessions to the Western powers. But also he was a modernist, he was a reformer and he was determined that his new state of Turkey would be a modern, non-religious, secular state. Modernity and secularism went hand-in-hand. It went hand-in-hand similarly after World War Two. The Egyptian leader, Nasser, wanted to have a free state in the sense that it was free of religion. A free state in the sense that it was free of backwardness and this meant secular modernization. Saddam Hussein, although we would now think this was almost a perverse comment, tried to do the same but in a more blood thirsty manner in Iraq. The idea of a state that would not be bound to religion, religion would exist but not be the dominating, determining force. But religion would take a second place to modernizing and secular institutions. This was something that Saddam tried ruthlessly to implement in his country of Iraq. Countries that had sprang up from poverty, from disunity and from religious backwardness were now being propelled dictatorially towards a form of Westphalianism towards a form of secularism. With the defeat of people like Saddam, great irony in our modern history, the Islamic genie is being unleashed again and Kissinger was right. It now will begin to challenge the Westphalian state system.


Fy ffordd. Mae hi, Dan Plash. Fy ffordd y directaeth, Fy ffordd y Cymru, Rwy'n ddechrau'r digud. Fy ffordd, I am y cyfnod, Mae'r coleg a'r cradwch yn ddiweddol yng nghymru ,'r ffwrdd yng Nghymru, yng Nghymru, fel yng Nghymru, yn ymgyrchio'r Cymraeg Felly, mae'r rai'r bwysig yn ddod i'r llwyddiadol ar gyfer ar gyfer'i bwysig, ond mae'r rai'r bwysig, rydyn ni'n bwysig o'r bwysig. Rydyn ni'n gweithio bod rydyn ni'n gweithio'r bwysig yn ddod i'r hollau. Mae'n gweithio i'r bwysig, ond mae'n gweithio'r bwysig yn ddod i'r bwysig. Mae'r bwysig yn gweithio'r bwysig ar gyfer y Uned, a'r bwysig ar Gwyrdd Brown. Rydyn ni'n gweithio'r bwysig yn ddod i'r Gradwyr Institution. Mae'r bwysig yn gweithio'r brown bwysig yn ddod i'r bwysig, ac mae'r bwysig yn gweithio'r brown bwysig, ond mae'r Uned yn gyflwyngig cyfleoedd yw'r ddod i'r brown, lle mae'r bwysig yw'r llwyddiadol yn gweithio'r llwyddiadol ar gyfer y Uned. Rydyn ni'n gweithio'r bwysig yw'r llwyddiadol ar gyfer y Uned, He has continued to write on the UN system, the UN development programme in particular. The great Brian Urquhart, who was a UN undersecretary and founder and architect of UN peacekeeping, introduced us because Brian took a shine to one of my books. As a result, Tom and I had a partnership bringing him to SOAS for several years, looking together at lessons from the forgotten UN before the UN, and that had a number of fun publications. Since then we've continued to work in parallel, and his most recent work is, would the world be better without the UN? Well, clearly Mr Trump and Mr Bolton think so, although nevertheless they turn up, or at least Mr Trump turns up, and maybe that's Bolton did too, so there's a story there, as we've discussed a little in class. The foreword is by the late and very much lamented cofiannan with whom Tom worked a good deal, and I think Tom will talk with us for half an hour, 40 minutes, about his work and findings and so on, and then we've got a chance to have a good half an hour's, at least discussion and interaction, and the two of us will then in the modern form sit in the comfy chairs with the microphones and bring you all into the discussion. So, without more ado, I will vacate the platform and ask you to welcome Tom. Thank you. Thanks Dan for the excessively kind words of introduction. I frequently ask myself how one of my two irreverent daughters would introduce me and undoubtedly would be somewhat different. In fact, many years ago when the older one, an economic consultant was about 12 years old and she was in her room and I had forgotten something. I was leaving for the airport and I ran back upstairs to pick up the papers and I hear this voice behind the door. She was with a friend. I really don't know what he does and I have no idea why anyone would pay him to say anything. I would pay him to keep quiet. So we'll see. It's a nice question. Would the world be better without the UN? This is actually for me a fairly existential question. I started in preparing the first time I gave a similar talk. I started mathematically challenged but I started counting backwards and I figured out that actually I was conceived while a San Francisco conference was in session in 1945 and I was actually born early in 1946 when the first sessions of the GA in the Security Council were meeting here in London. My entire career, both as a professional and a secretariat and then as the head of an NGO doing work on UN issues and then as a fuzzy headed academic for about the last 30 years is revolved around the behavior and misbehavior of the UN. So to accompany this question this evening I thought I'd add a second one. Would the world be better without Donald Trump? Now the answers to the two questions actually are related and the information that I try to put in this book, the stories I try to tell, I'd like to think of a modest way of answering the second one to which the answer is an unequivocal yes. And it's not just an onslaught against the UN. It's against anything multilateral. So I'll be going back and forth between the two. So and we do have this modest thing called an election next Tuesday which I'm feeling a tad optimistic but nonetheless uneasy about. We can talk about that later. But Trump's remarks frequently disparage the UN as mostly a waste of money. But this is accompanied by his aversion frankly to collaborative decision making in any format. So what I'd like to try to do is provide a short summary of the book but then put Trump's comments in September of 2017 and September of 2018 and from the General Assembly in a bit of a context referring to the work that Dan and I did together on the wartime of the United Nations when there was a different kind of threat and certainly a different kind of US leadership. And then I'll end up with a few words about what I think may be happening on First Avenue in New York. Well, answering this question actually frankly it should have been done at any time in the last almost three quarters of a century but it really, really is much more critical in the age of Trump or the age of Brexit and the age of a lot of other people. And it's particularly important now that the third national security adviser John Bolton is appointed who made quite a well-earned reputation for being an enfant terrible in New York when he served for not quite two years as the unapproved by the Senate permanent representative of the United States in New York. Both of them sneer at international institutions at any time. Allies and partnerships are irrelevant in a zero-sum world and my argument will be frankly that the approach is not only ahistorical it's also wrong. So as I said I'm going to concentrate on the UN but this is really a much broader gage attack on international institutions, multilateralism, whatever form. Security organizations, NATO was obsolete or cost too much and they don't fare much better than cooperative arrangements of any time, economic ones, so disparages the European Union, tears up the Trans-Pacific Partnership, disparages NAFTA, the World Trade Organization is next on the horizon and these efforts are actually proceeding either without the United States or under active attack by the United States but the discrete cooperative actions, the Paris Agreement or the global compact on migration withdraw from those and informal arrangements, the group of seven, the group of 20 another group of seven minus one or the group of 20 minus one and in fact the minimal definition of a multilateral effort would be three and NAFTA actually wasn't even that, it was two sets of bilateral negotiations. So in case you, apparently the book will be sold later but in case you're not going to read it this evening the answer is on page 190 and the answer actually as I said is considered no but I ask an honest question and what I try to do in the two parts of the book is generate some not alternative facts but uncomfortable facts for both foes and friends of the UN. This book and the class tomorrow morning I try to focus on the two main outputs of the UN the universal body that sets standards, ideas, norms and then an operational one which is in a lot of countries I think in too many countries but it's important to keep those two sets of products outputs distinct and the book tries to do that but in there is a two by three matrix so you've got the ideas and operations and across the top are the three main kinds of activities international peace and security human rights and humanitarian action and the third one being sustainable development. So part one of the book consists of really specific illustrations on how the world would have been a much worse place at several junctures over the last seven decades without the UN system. This part of my argument is designed certainly for the administration or the heritage foundation the American Enterprise Institute a host of other people who attack the rules-based order that the US helped put together and has nourished frankly over the last seven decades. So I say kind of what's the evidence there's lots in there but let me just take off a few that without the first UN of member states without the second UN of leaders and international civil servants where would it be without the campaign in 1977 to eliminate smallpox or the current ones getting worm and polio? The efforts over the years to formulate women's rights or at least getting them on the agenda in San Francisco and subsequently in the Universal Declaration and elsewhere or to deliver humanitarian assistance in the DRC or Sudan kept the peace on the Golan Heights or Cyprus actually in the early years to facilitate decolonization and a whole set of development norms and ideas to make a stab at protecting cultural heritage and war zones, prosecuting war criminals and the list goes on. So that's the first part of the book but the second part of the book the parallel structure involves a second counterfactual and this is for cheerleaders with blue pom-poms in UN associations across the planet because the debits on the UN's ledger are also substantial. So the planet could have been a whole lot better on numerous occasions as well with a little better behavior in the United States and international civil service. You know if the security household had not been quite as hypocritical in 1994 in Rwanda or at present in Syria and Yemen and Myanmar and the list goes on or if peacekeepers had maybe rape fewer kids in Central Africa or spread less cholera and Haiti if more competent and dedicated staff had actually performed better or even in research had monitored far more objectively and occasionally called a spate of shovel on the performance of member states. If there were fewer inter-organizational turf battles over resources and this operation actually operated more cohesively in short the second counterfactual explores what would have happened if the 193 currently member states had behaved a little more responsibly and 100,000 or so civil servants and about the same number of soldiers and police had been more creative, more competent, more courageous. So when I wrote the proposal to write this book to the Carnegie Corporation which has generously supported it I really was aiming at a book coming out next year for the 75th anniversary 220 and after the elections I simply felt I had to write it more quickly and still in the United States there are lots of criticism genophobia, racism, corruption tax benefits for the rich, tax on the environment tax on the constitution. Multilateralism still doesn't actually fit on anyone's list and not that this book is necessarily going to get it anywhere but this is a traditional problem in the United States that it's hard to get multilateral issues on anyone's agenda. If you go back and look at the debates between Clinton and Trump the word UN never appeared and it appeared once in the previous debates when Obama was on a stage. So it seems to me that if you take a look at the first year 2017 it began with cutting completely the funds for the population fund part of the UN that works on women and girls reproductive health it ended the year with the official withdrawal from UNESCO and in between we saw pulling out of the Paris agreements and reneging on the commitment to the Green Climate Fund pulling out of the global compact on migration and then at the end of the year just for good measure in the Security Council of the US we saw a contribution that suggested that maybe moving the capital to Jerusalem was not the greatest of ideas and then when the General Assembly said the same thing the initial reaction was to get rid of the final contribution for 2017 to the relief and works agency for Palestine and then 2018 has hardly been a better vintage as I mentioned the the bi-assess pool of the UN of the Human Rights Council that's Nick Haley's description pull out of that rip up the P5 plus one agreement on Iran now going to zero for UNRA from 360 million to zero and we still have a couple of months to go so stay tuned so my modest hope here is that some of what's in this book will contribute to a conversation about the importance of multilateralism in the United States because my sense is that the shots across the bow in 2017 and 2018 could become broad sides in a much more serious way and certainly if you think about the G7 or NATO summits from last year and the tantrums that were thrown there and if any ruling of the World Trade Organization goes against the United States so the UN is not a four letter word it's merely a two letter invective so with that as a bit of an introduction to what's in the book I thought I'd try to put in context Trump's first two presentations Dan, you mentioned Brian Urachart, dear guy and when I was interviewing him for the intellectual history somewhere toward the end of it I said, well, you've been in this bloody thing for 40 years what is the real problem? and Brian said Tom, my friend the UN is the last bastion of state sovereignty and this year as we look at the 40th anniversary of the Declaration on Human Rights there's been a bit of erosion to Brian that is the usual presidents prime ministers and princes who claim that whatever they do at home is okay behind borders we've begun to at least on occasion make inroads on that the responsibility to protect which I had something to do with on occasion we removed the permission slip for sovereign thugs and one should keep in mind that there are almost 600 treaties international treaties that are on deposit at the UN and in any case countries whether we're talking about financial transfers, technology, information certain kinds of invasions are a little difficult to resist so sovereignty ain't what it used to be we go back to the first speech that Trump gave to UN he's a redundant speaker but 21 times he used the word state sovereignty sacrosanct state sovereignty now if you had been there the biggest applause actually came from Russia and China and Myanmar and Venezuela and Sudan and the list goes on because these countries in the past have used state sovereignty as a way to fend off criticisms from Washington that's no longer necessary and you don't actually happen I'm not one that happened to have to be an Obama groupie to go back and read any of his speeches his first speech to the UN he mentioned the word sovereignty once and that was in the context of saying how US national interest could be served by utilizing international organizations in particular the UN so I'm reminded of a quote by Samuel Johnson who says it's kind of wrapping yourself in the flag as the last refuge of scoundrels and it also flies in the face of problem solving of virtually any important issue from terrorism to weapons of mass destruction and the list goes on so the power of one to do much about that is truly limited hence I'm hoping the contents of this book will be of some significance now I'm not the first person to point this out but it's interesting to go back and look at the origins of America first actually the shortest lived best financed anti-war movement of all time happened to be have led by three proto fascist Charles Lindbergh, Henry Ford and Father Coughlin who established this group to keep the US out of World War II that committee lasted about 11 months it collapsed after Pearl Harbor Trump's version has not as yet it will and I hope without the equivalent of December 1941 that said I try to point out that the organizations limitations only its sovereignty bound constitution but also the atomized nature of and wasteful nature of many of its operations should be as obvious to anyone else so before getting to the secretary generals what he's trying to do in New York I wanted to take a minute to go back to the wartime history because as I said Trump and Bolton have never met an ally or an organization that they liked but history has other lessons for us here and so for me it's important to think about the conditions under which US interests were served by a different approach in the face of a different kind of existential threat namely fascism so as we point out in this book on the wartime origins of the organization the origins were actually on 1 January 1942 not June of 1945 or the conferences leading up to it when 26 allies later 44 pooled efforts to crush Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan but along with that commitment military commitment came a longer term commitment to international cooperation collaboration as the best way to guarantee post war peace and stability and prosperity so what we tried to do in this book and the reason I'm returning to it is that one has to keep in mind that the UN was not simply a way to put in evidence military might in North Africa and Europe and Asia but it was a commitment to follow up with international obligations so this powerful mixture of realism and a lot of things we call it idealism was really important and in looking through the documents and looking at what was happening in Washington and Whitehall and lots of other places it wasn't simply crushing fascism I mean that was the primary purpose but lots of other issues were on the table decolonization international criminal justice post war reconstruction refugee assistance international development regulating the world economy agriculture and educational policy and the list goes on so those war time planners unlike the current gang rejected unilateral military might and diplomacy and lawlessness as policy options so to make a long story short San Francisco was not peripheral but central to U.S. decision making and so while we said in this book that one might have expected the fact that the league fell flat on its face to have led to realism hubs on steroids it didn't it led to the rule of law not going it alone and not the law of the jungle but multilateralism and the rule of law so the solution was not 1914 minus but 1918 plus to build on the successes and there were some of the league and try to do it better the next time so while normally speaking one says ah that's those that's those Canada's and Korea's it's the middle powers of the world that are really really interested in multilateral cooperation unilateralism there are times at which in fact when the conditions are right and the leadership is right collaboration is actually the best way to go and my argument is in fact we are and have been for some time a spot in which many not all but many problems that are dear to the United States need to be approached in a multilateral fashion so what are the implications of America first on first avenue the place to begin of course is that alas Trump is not alone on this stage you folks have your brexit but we can it's also the age of Putin and Erdogan and Xi and Modi and Duterte recently on and on so there is actually an unfortunate and ugly shift to the right but the United States has a unusual ability to wreak political and financial havoc in the UN and so we need to pay attention to the actions of the Trump administration so as always there is an argument about saving money so the population fund $70 million the U.S. said well we got to save a billion dollars on peacekeeping and ended up being about 600 million so the U.S. portion of that is about 170 million and even if you throw in all of UNRAM you are talking about a rounding error in a U.S. budget but this really has legs domestically and of course the implications of this are that how what of Moscow and Beijing think about saving money well the best way to save money for peacekeeping is get rid of any human rights dimensions and peacekeeping operations which is what they are not proposing it may in fact be some of the parallel efforts kind of outside the UN that may be the most toxic on trade and not just the TPP and threatening NAFTA but steel tariffs and aluminum tariffs and et cetera really really played directly into the hands of China and Russia I mean their foreign policy for years have been to divide the west they no longer have to do this for themselves they have somebody in Washington doing that work for them I think it's Beijing that's made the most of this opportunity to date presented somewhat on a silver platter they can better dictate the standards of investment and production on Asia they pick up new trading partners and you know they now become the voice for reason and stability somewhat counterintuitively and if you look at the Paris agreement really China has been the direct beneficiary of this myopia leading advocate for controlling climate change ironically as they become the biggest producer of greenhouse gases in several cities if you visit there you're not supposed to breathe in them so but they're controlling the world market three quarters of the solar panels they've actually made some huge steps on urban pollution meanwhile a dear President Trump is getting rid of environmental regulations and talking about jobs in coal mines so this is certainly not going to make America great again it's likely to make it more polluted again I think there is some hope next week and certainly in the 220 elections in the sense that the next election presidential elections occur a few days before the US could legally pull out of the Paris agreement and there is lots of activity US cities, US states, US corporations who have committed themselves to respecting the commitments on the Paris agreement so I'm somewhat hopeful that this thing will still be intact when a different administration comes on board so what are the prospects that the UN will not become a relic well reform has been a topic that has been discussed since the ink was drying on the charter in June of 1945 so the efforts to make it more inclusive more transparent, more accountable to pull together the atomized parts of the system have been going on forever my own evaluation is that the results are far more modest than they should be but the decimal the decimal levels of criticism are increasing and it's not just in Washington last year I did an evaluation of Swedish funding to the United Nations system there was no UN project that wasn't likely to get their favor that has changed there's a far more cost benefit transactional approach even in Stockholm among the parliamentarians, journalists and the public and it seems to me that the multilateral narrative if it has less traction in Stockholm it has much less traction in Washington so I think it needs to ask the kinds of questions I'm asking in this book to think about what would the world look like without the UN and you can do lots of transactional analyses of the UN just to take a couple if you go back to the Cuban Missile Crisis and you look at the documents both Kennedy and Khrushchev see Utahns diplomacy as a crucial variable in the conversation to end that crisis that wasn't the only variable of course but I'm sort of do we really want to test the proposition that having this kind of capacity around is a bad idea and if you want to be transactional the record breaking $8 billion of peacekeeping operations last year that was about two weeks of the Iraq war in the middle of the last decade or what about the smallpox if you go back and look the total cost of the smallpox eradication program run by W.H.L. was $300 million actually only $100 million of that was W.H.O. money of that only about 35 million was U.S. money and over the years the 40 years since that time it would be I don't quite know how to do this but one could come up with a rather large positive balance sheet in terms of savings of administration alone let alone vaccines let alone the people not marred by it so I think we need to emphasize the value for money of UN operations so in comes Antonio Guterres I frankly have and have written such have been disappointed to date he's 40% into his mandate of five years I think some hard questions about the UN's comparative advantage need to be asked is definitely a role for the UN in structuring conversations about global problems being operational in only a few places I think really conflict prone countries so fewer operations with more concentration on the operational side doing the universal side for standards, norms and conversations about global comments it's the waste here I always get into trouble think that I'm coming from there the waste the overlap the lack of synergy in the UN and the system of organizations is substantial and my initial hope was that Guterres who had actually run a pretty tight shop as high commissioner for refugees and Geneva had slimmed things down and earned a reputation I thought he was going to do some of the same at least at the new in New York I have not lost total hope that somebody who understands the structural flaws the way he does and staffing shortcomings will attack this problem head on and in fact here may be the silver lining I think he could actually use the Trump administration's tightening of screws to actually do things that everyone or everyone commissions, academics and journalists have said needed to be done for a very long period of time so I'm going to end and I'm now with the frequently cited remark of that the UN was not created to get humanity to heaven but to save it from hell and I try to keep in mind and I like you guys to keep in mind as well that one of the reasons we're not in the netherworld already have been the positive contributions of this institution but a world without the UN is not unimaginable and political conditions continue or worsen and in fact I think one of the perhaps more insidious threats is that the UN has become so embedded that it's taken for granted and Kevin Wright, the former Australian Prime Minister wrote a while back he said we're barely conscious of the continuing stabilizing role that the UN plays in setting the broad parameters for the conduct of international relations and he says if the UN one day disappears or more likely slides into neglect which is I think what's happening it is only then that we become fully aware of the gaping hole this would leave in what remained of the post World War II order so my argument is warts and all I guess I present to you all the warts in part one and part two go to the last line of Trump's 217 remarks to the GA and he said we are calling for a great reawakening of nations he somehow overlooked the fact that the organization was created to curb the demonstrated barriers of nations and of nationalism run amach so I don't think he'll say it but somebody else will say it soon that we really need a great reawakening of the United Nations so let me stop there and hope that this will stimulate a few questions


It is my distinct pleasure to introduce Jane Durk and Jane was a medical student at Baylor. She was an ophthalmology resident at the University of Utah. Back before the Moran Eye Center was the Moran Eye Center. She has done a neuro-ophthalmology fellowship at the University of Iowa. She did three different glaucoma fellowships. One with Alan Crandall at the U, one in London at Morefields, and then one in Portland, Oregon. Then we were lucky enough to have her on our faculty during the 90s before she and John decided to go to Spokane and spent a lot of their career there, but then moved back to Salt Lake City and we're lucky to have her as a neighbor collaborator and mentor for some of our folks since that time. She is our distinguished alumni person of the year for the Moran Eye Center and Department of Ophthalmology. She's also my good friend and I'm absolutely thrilled to hear what she has to say. Jane, you're on. Oh, thank you, Bob, for that lovely introduction. Let me just hope, hope, hope that I can manage to do this. You're there. Okay. Okay, I think I've got it. All right. Thank you all so much for the invitation to speak here today. Like I said, I'm really sad this is a virtual event. I was hoping to meet a lot of you. Please, please come up and introduce yourselves when my next have the pleasure of attending a live Brown rounds. I know that when Jeff Petty first called me to let me know about this award, I was so honored and grateful, but more than a little bit anxious about what I could possibly talk to you all about. So I pulled up my old CV and started looking at reprints and one of the things I considered and thought about was I syndromes I had reported on this really great case of Cogan Reese many years ago so I thought well that's a consideration. And then I thought about a paper I'd written on same site revision of failing filters and I had great photos of encapsulated blubs and the cluted fistulas tight scleral flaps. Episcleral membranes and I thought well you know this is this is a real possibility. And then I also considered lens induce glaucoma I had written a book chapter and I've always been really interested in the subject. And yet the more I thought about all of these I thought, honestly, you have really great attendings who are totally up to date in all areas of ophthalmology. And, you know, I haven't practiced full time for several years and should really try to find a subject that you might not hear from your current attendings. I also remember that when Jeff petty introduced me at the Academy alumni event in New Orleans. He mentioned that I was in the running for the most fellowships ever. And I realized that I have had a lot of really great mentors and probably more than most. And then that was reinforced. When I was I was looking through this book that the chapter lens induce glaucoma and I saw this forward from one of my mentors Mike van busker can I just like to read a small quote from from the forward. From their roots in the ancient world physicians have always been called upon both to heal and to teach the latter perhaps the more sacred of the duties. Healing helps one at a time but the passing of the knowledge reaches millions for generations to come. Teachers of medicine can feel no greater joy and whether their own students embark on a project of sharing their knowledge. Like I said it just re emphasized to me the importance of mentors in our lives and so I elected to discuss discuss mentorship and some of the lessons that I learned from my mentors. I'll come back to the other two subjects that I mentioned earlier but from the standpoint of mentorship. So, what I'd like to do is just start a little bit with a brief history of mentorship, and then talk about how I arranged or more commonly fell into fellowships. And then it's come to my attention that some of the great leaders in ophthalmology either retire or pass away and sometimes the next generation is really unaware of their contributions. So I would like to just take a few minutes to honor my mentors by telling you just a little about them. And then I learned, of course a lot of science from them but what I really want to talk about are the other lessons, the life lessons I learned or the mentoring lessons that I learned from these people. Now, not all of the situations mentorship situations I found myself in were perfect, but universally they were silver linings, and I'd like to look at this both from my view as a my experience as a mentee, and as a mentor. I think most of us are aware in general what mentorship is it's the relationship between two people where the individual with more experience, knowledge and connections is able to pass along what they have learned to a more junior individual within a certain field. And their benefits to both sides in this equation the mentor can lead future generations in a field that they care deeply about. They can receive the help that they need to make the next step in their careers. Now, mentor is a character mentioned in Homer's Odyssey. And when Odysseus leaves to fight in the Trojan war Odysseus he entrusts his young son Telemachus into the care of mentor his trusted companion. Many, many examples of mentorship throughout history, particularly in various religious disciplines, the medieval guild system. But it's not really until the 1990s that mentorship is popularized in the United States as a, as a term and a tool. And I personally suspect this has something to do with increasing diversity in the workforce, and those looking to try to climb the ladder in their careers looking for some some help in that regard. So, I've included this photograph, which is one of my favorites from the Pacific Coast auto ophthalmologic society which was actually a fairly large gathering at the time of otolaryngologist and ophthalmologist and this happened to be in Spokane, Washington in 1917. And it's a little bit blurry but you can see easily see that all the members were white men. Now when I left, excuse me, when I sadly left Moran in 2001 and joined the Spokane eye clinic in private practice. At that time, about 100% of the physicians were men and 99% of the staff were women. Excuse me my throat's dry. Anyway, I will never forget my first day in the operating room. I handed a pair of flowered scrubs from the nurses station and went into the OR where there were new instruments new Faco units news assistants, and I felt really incredible stress and pressure not to fail to show this staff of women that a woman could actually do this work. Now the point of this story is is it can be really really nice to have mentors that look or sound like you. But your mentor does not have to come from the same background, all of my mentors are men. So what is really necessary. And what I would like to submit to you is that what you're really looking for in a mentor is someone who wants to share relevant information and expertise. Who's not afraid of the mentee excelling, who displays positivity and enthusiasm for the field gives honest and constructive feedback has extensive experience in the relative field, and is credible and trustworthy. Anything else is really icing. So I'd like to just take you on my own personal journey into postgraduate education. And I've included this photograph from the ophthalmology department in 1986. And you can see it's quite a bit smaller than it is today we had six residents I think you could see Mike Teske there in the first row was my co resident. I had mentors about six faculty, but what we didn't have was a neuro ophthalmologist. Now I had decided to pursue a career in glaucoma and Alan Crandall had agreed to take me as his first fellow. And then sometime that year I was summoned to see Randy Olson. I'm not the only one in the department who has had such a summons I know for a fact that Jeff petty had a similar conversation. And I suspect there have been many others. But anyway Randy sat me down and he said, you know, we need a neuro ophthalmologist and I have spoken to the people at Iowa, and they will take you and you only have to go for six months, and then you can come back and be our neuro ophthalmologist but you can spend six months with Alan, but you'll be, you know, you'll be working neuro ophthalmologist. So, after thinking about this for a while, realizing that I, I really had a lot to gain and not much to lose and figuring out where Iowa was. I packed my bags drove to Iowa City where I met these two men, Stan Thompson and Jim Corbett. Well, Stan was an extraordinary man, the son of English missionaries in China. He was the founder and director of the neuro ophthalmology division at Iowa. You can see from this photograph where there are five of us, five of us fellows and you should recognize the one at the end your own Kathleen degree. They trained and influence numerous residents of fellows and had a huge huge impact on the field of neuro ophthalmology. The incredible thing about the six months was taking an hour every day to review every on call patient from the night before with the whole ophthalmology department. And then another hour to discuss each neuro patient from the day before. And it was really such a great intellectual pleasure. Stan ran the, the department for 30 years and the clinic is now named for him. Stan was affectionately known as Mr. Pupil. They're really, I don't believe was much of anything he didn't know about pupils and I've included this flow chart to sort sorting out the anti sequoias that he published in 1976. You've probably seen this many times reproduced extended expanded upon, but it's really a mark of his intellect that he was able to distill something so complicated to make it relatively easy to evaluate. This was the first time I'd ever known that you could ever measure a relative affluent pupil defects I thought they came in, you know, one to four plus, and I certainly never looked at an iris so in depth. Now Stan was also a master clinician, he was especially good in dealing with functional and difficult patients, which unfortunately they were a fair number in the neuro clinic. I've included this paper of his from 95 on functional visual loss, he had so many great tricks for just determining that there was no actual organic disease which of course is key in the evaluation. And I'm also so grateful to him for exposing me to this paper by Groves. It's about taking care of the hateful patient which is really dealing with manipulative demanding dependent patients. I referred back to this paper so many times in my career. I just wanted to share it with you. One of the other things I'm really really grateful for was this corn party that he hosted every year. And at the beginning of the year he would invite the whole department to his farm just outside of Iowa City and he would pick corn and cook it up in huge cauldrons, and everyone would bring side dishes to share. It's such a wonderful way to be welcome to the ophthalmology department and to be made to feel part of the ophthalmology family. And the other thing I learned from him was the importance of decompressing at the end of the day. Now Stan kept a bottle of sherry in his desk drawer. And at the end of a particularly tough day we retire to his office and have a few sips of sherry and discuss whatever had been going on. So I tried to carry on that tradition. Fortunately for Randy, not with sherry, but I did try to keep a box of chocolates or cookies or something. And it's something I tried to continue really throughout my career was just to take five minutes with the staff, the end of the day to just decompress before everybody headed out into their otherwise very busy lives. And the core of it was also a great intellect. He was a world expert on idiopathic intracranial hypertension. And it's because of him and Stan Thompson that I learned so so much about optic neuropathies that I felt I had a really good basic knowledge to handle tough optic nerve cases. It was a patient that was sent to me for a tribeculectomy. Fortunately, I knew enough to realize that a trap was really not going to help this brain tumor very much. Now this is a pretty cut and dried case. The visual field kind of gave it away, but there were many much more subtle cases like other pseudo glaucomas or glaucomas plus other diseases plus hydrocephalus or any other number of optic neuropathies. So I was I was forever grateful for them, giving me this training. Now the silver lining for living in a basement apartment in Iowa City for six months was that I had an amazing foundation for career academic career in glaucoma. I learned the joy of daily in depth discussions. And maybe the best thing about that was that the basement apartment was right next door to Kathleen degree. And it was really the start of a really lifelong friendship and collaboration, particularly on many projects designed to get us to Arvo in Sarasota every year. So, following this six months in Iowa, I went back to Salt Lake City to become what felt like the only neuro ophthalmologist in the Western United States. I did not get a lot of time to do glaucoma with Alan but I did thankfully get some time in the operating room with him which was a huge importance. So, about two and a half years later when my husband finished his residency, I thought you know I really need some more glaucoma training and I had been born in England I had family there and so we thought well this is a good time to go to England and I can get some additional training in glaucoma there so I did a little research and found that Roger Hitchings was a very very prominent glaucomatologist in England. And so he had a wide wide range of contributions to the field. And I, about a year before I sent him a letter with my CV and asked whether he'd be willing to take me as a fellow, and like a lovely letter back from him saying yes he'd be delighted to have me. So, in 19 summer of 1989, we arrived in England and I showed up at the Moorfields eye clinic. And to my surprise found that there were conservatively at least 12 other fellows from all over the world. And I could barely see the solid lamp let alone see what Roger Hitchings was looking at. So I'm a fairly visual learner and I thought after a little while of this I thought this really is not going to work very well for me. So I started to look around and I was introduced to Noel Rice. Now Noel Rice was a really really wonderful man this photograph was of him was taken many years before I met him. He was a pioneer in micro surgery. He was specialized in congenital glaucoma and established that service at Moorfields eye hospital. He held a congenital glaucoma clinic once the week, and I learned so much about how to take care of this special group of patients and their families. He was a pioneer in anti scarring treatment. Well before my demise in the fight a few he was using beta radiation as an anti scarring method. I had a huge interest in external disease and because of that I had access to the external disease clinic at Moorfields, which was absolutely full of incredible pathology I saw so many interesting things. So besides learning about congenital glaucoma. One of the things that I learned which probably should have been obvious to me, but wasn't at the time and that is that it's really really smart to make personal contact with other fellows before engaging and barking on a fellowship. However, if you find yourself in a situation where a mentor is not meeting your educational goals or needs by all means don't be afraid to change and find a mentor that does. There were a lot of silver linings, as I mentioned the pathology walking through Moorfields eye hospital every day was really extraordinary. There were the obvious pleasures of living in London traveling and reconnecting with my extended family. And then at the end of that year we headed off to Portland, Oregon, where my husband had what's going to be doing a fellowship in facial plastics, a second year. At this point, I was six and a half months pregnant. And so we arrived in Portland and I was planning to, you know, unpack and I did that impact in a couple of days and then I looked around I didn't know anybody and didn't have anything to do and I thought I can't possibly sit around waiting for this baby to arrive for number two and three months. And so I started to wonder if there might be somebody willing to let me look over their shoulder for a while just to learn whatever I could. And so I did a little bit of research and read about Mike van Bosker, I called Alan Crandall he gave me the thumbs up. And so I called and made an appointment with him. Mike van Bosker was a really, really, really accomplished man. He had his undergrad medical degrees from Harvard fellowship at Mass Eye and Ear with Morton Grant, he established the glaucoma service of OHSU and then he left in 1990, which is when I met him to become chief of ophthalmology at Devers Eye Institute. He was the founding editor of the Journal of Glaucoma, he was a founding member of the American Glaucoma Society and president of that society. He retired in 2004 and continued to teach for a while but then also expanded his other interests and has written several nonfiction books and has really had a whole second career in photography. So I made this appointment with him and sat down and just explained my situation and asked if I could, if you would mind if I maybe followed him around in clinic from time to time just to learn anything he might have to teach. And he sat back and said, Well, you know, let me think about this. And then the next day he called me and said, How would you like to be my fellow for the next year. And of course that was more than I had even dreamt of. But then I had to remind him that, you know, I was pregnant. And he said, Well, what would a good schedule for you be.   Now Mike has written hundreds of papers, original articles, books, book chapters but one I really want to mention to you is his clinical atlas of block commas which is one of my all time paper books in ophthalmology. It is absolutely full of wonderful images, particularly of the secondary block commas. And I use this book over and over again teaching medical students and first year residents. And I'm, I'm pretty sure there's a copy of this in the library I think Alan's copy is in the Moran library. Now he had so many contributions to the field that I couldn't even begin to start telling about them all but one thing I do want to mention is that he developed this technique for imaging ocular blood vessels. And what he did was cannulate fine vessels in autopsy eyes with plastic tubes, and then injected methacrylate into the lumens removes the tissue, and then did scanning electron microscopy. And you can see here in the upper picture you can see the vasculature of the optic nerve and inferiorly of the ciliary body, and he contributed enormously to our understanding of ocular blood flow. So, besides the incredible science and clinical medicine I learned from him. I once again learned the importance of making a stranger welcome in your community, the importance of family, he and his really lovely wife Betty welcomed me into their family. They included me in family celebrations. She gave me my first Mother's Day present. And it was so important for someone dropped into a city knowing absolutely no one to feel to feel welcomed. She also taught me the importance of forming a great team and appreciating and respecting their work.  Mike van Bosker was an unbelievable scientist clinician educator administrator, but he could not about have done this without his team and. And he says, I think he says it best with his own words, and this is a note that he sent to Joanne when she received an award. He said, you have done so much for me personally managing my practice, moving with me to Good Samaritan, helping me in surgery and a myriad of little things without which I could not have accomplished what I was able to manage in my career. And it was a really, really important lesson to me. Now, this is I'm coming back to the, the article I mentioned about same site revision failed filtering gloves. This was some research that I did with Mike van Bosker, and I had the honor of publishing the first article in the first volume of the Journal of glaucoma. Apparently it helps to have the editor as one of your co authors. And then he invited me to speak at a meeting in Portland a several years later about the same subject and at the end of the meeting he pulled me aside and said, I think it's time for you to start teaching this part of my course at the academy. And he basically passed the baton at that point he invited Jack Chaffee who was his fellow after me to run, run the course and included cul-de-sing Jeff Liebman Bob Fechner. And I had the honor of talking about failing filters I became known as the queen of failing filters. But this course went on for years and years and years I was involved for about 17 years but it is, I believe, ongoing with some additions and some people changing out. And I know was really prominent in promoting my career in including me in AGS committees. And I know that my involvement in glaucoma day lectures stem from him and I just, I want to make a little comment to Abigail about your talk earlier. I want to know that at the time I was invited to my first glaucoma day lecture. There had been a number of comments from the from people who had attended the glaucoma day the year before commenting on the fact that the entire speaking committee was all all men. No, no women speaking. And I believe that I was actually the beneficiary of some reverse discrimination in that they read those reviews and actually tried very hard to start including women as speakers at big meetings. So, I was really, really fortunate to have found someone who was really just unstinting in this promotion of my career. One of the key linings to this year with it I finally felt like I had a full glaucoma fellowship I had patched between some time with Alan and some time in London and some time with Mike van Bosker. I felt like I was actually trained in glaucoma. And thankfully Randy Olsen agreed and invited me to come back and join the faculty. This time as a glaucoma specialist. I also made some really incredible lifelong friendships there. Of course there's no silver linings without clouds and the only really downside to this year was that I got minimal surgical experience. I know that glaucoma surgery is an art and watching is not the same thing as doing and so that lack of experience made for a really difficult year as a first year glaucoma attending. Now, the point being that this is yet another thing that you should talk to prior fellows about for embarking on fellowship. For me, any experience at that point was better than having no experience for a year. And I was incredibly lucky to have had personal surgical time, both as a resident and as a fellow with Alan Crandall. But once again it was a, it was a very difficult transition for me. I don't like to talk about learning from mentees. I learned from every resident and particularly the fellows. They all brought new perspectives from their prior institutions. Norm Zabriskie who became a good friend and colleague I learned from for many years as we shared difficult patients. We had the fellow who in the middle of a case handed me a trabeculectomy flap with a pair of forceps. And together we learned how to fix that problem. And then of course there's like Ahmed, and I am still learning from like, as is the rest of the world about innovative glaucoma procedures. And I am so thrilled to see him as a director of the Alan S Crandall Center for glaucoma innovation. Congratulations to my. Now I want to go back to the case of Cogan Reese that I mentioned at the start, and talk about it in light of what I learned about mentoring medical students. I don't include this case. Partially because I just can't pass up the opportunity to share it. But like I said, I, it's also about what I learned about mentoring students so you can see here in this first picture. In April 1992, that there is abnormality of the iris to purely and temporally some atropian UVA, and so called iris nevi, and then there's a higher power view. And I'd like to give a shout out to Paula Morris, a photography at Moran who did these great images. These images are from about five years later. And you can see a lot more atrove in atropian UVA and then the abnormal iris architecture has extended the 360 degrees and includes the inferior virus at this point. I'm also lucky to have had a sample of iris obtained at the time of a prior trabeculectomy and Nick Mamelis and his group did the histopathology for me on this. And you can see here particularly on the right the abnormal basement membrane like tissue on the surface of iris with pigmented iris protrusion through the finestra in the membrane. But what I really, what is really special to me about this paper is highlighted at the bottom right. And that is that the first author is a medical student. Now I was involved in some medical students summer research projects for about five years. The project I was doing was a long term ongoing genetics research. And they did a lot of the Scott work tracking down families blood collection other genetic material collection. But I knew that they would never get a paper out of that project. And so I tried to find a small limited project for the students that they could get published in the limited time they have. And when I went back and looked at the students that I've worked with. It turned out that every single one of them, but one was accepted into an ophthalmology residency program. And the one that didn't, we unfortunately lost a dermatology. It's sometimes hard to write papers with medical students it's often easier to do it by yourself. They don't always know the lingo or the terms to use. But it was so worth it when I discovered the enjoyment of being able to pay back some of the help that I had received and to help someone else start their career. This plant. This plant here is to remind me of something that I actually learned from Alan Crandall, which is to never miss an opportunity to teach but was reinforced to me by one of my mentees. Now, my mentee was an ophthalmic assistant that gave me this plant, many, many years ago when it was tiny, maybe four inches tall. And she had married young had a child came to work for the Spokanei Clinic, when her child was in medical middle school. Of course we all teach our staff. Why not it helps us the more your staff know the more they can help you. But this young woman was she was like a spun she absorbed everything she asked questions she wanted to know more. At some point she went back to school while working full time and got a college degree. And then I had the pleasure of writing a letter of recommendation for her to optometry school. And she is now a practicing optometrist. So, every week when I water this plant, which apparently likes living in Utah, I smile, and I remember her, and I remember to never miss an opportunity to teach. Now we all have informal mentors. And for me that was women in ophthalmology. This was a group started in the early 90s. There weren't very many women in the department. There was a department member who was coming with some in some challenging circumstances. So I went to Julia Klein Schmidt who many of you know who's in the front row in this picture. And who started this patient support program at Moran, and who kept women in ophthalmology going. Really she was the backbone throughout the years. And we discussed what would be the best way to support this person. And we decided to start having some evening dinners to offer support to her. The irony of all this is that I gained so much more support than I ever gave and I learned so much from these women about juggling motherhood and career and just life in general. It was an illustration to me of the need to find people organizations for mutual support in our challenging lives. And I know that women in ophthalmology has been a COVID casualty but I'm really thrilled to hear that it may be starting back up again. Now I'd also like to tell you about another informal mentor of mine, Marlene Moster. Many of you have heard of Marlene she's an outstanding educator, particularly in glaucoma. But the most important thing I ever learned from Marlene was at a women in glaucoma luncheon. And what she was talking about was getting help. And I really, really wish I had heard this talk, many years earlier in my career. One of the things that used to absolutely take me down was when I get home from work and find out that one of my children had a birthday party the next day and that we didn't have a birthday gift. And if we did have a gift we didn't have wrapping paper. And so somebody would have to go out and deal with that problem. What Marlene talked about was all the things that she had done to make her life easier. She hired a barber to come to her house every six to eight weeks to cut the whole family's hair. She had a house cleaner. She had someone buy her groceries and put them away. She had yard care. And she had someone to buy the birthday gifts and wrap them. So, this advice is not just for those who have dual career families with children, it's really for anyone that has a passion in life that they want to make time for. Decide what is really important for you to spend your time on, and then delegate the rest. And then of course there's Alan Crandall. So, you all know as much about his accomplishments as I do. Excuse me. A lot has been said in last year or so to honor him. And so I won't repeat that now. I do want to tell you about the special lessons I learned from him. So, I can remember the very first day in clinic with him it was my first day of residency. I went into clinic and introduced myself and he said of course I know who you are and invited me over to the slit lamp and asked me what I could see and what did I think about that white fluffy stuff on the lens. And when I walked out of the room I thought, well, this is going to be fun. And Alan taught me that your life's work can and should be fun. He was an incredible teacher of surgery.  I'm usually pretty sure that there's somebody else in the room who could do a better job at whatever it was and I could. But he just never let me get away with that. He always pushed me to take on more challenging cases, until I came to believe that I too could handle them. And then there was another person who was really unstinting in my career promotion. Everybody knows that Alan got invited to all the A-list parties. And he would drag me around and introduce me to everybody that he knew, which was pretty much everybody. He included me in courses and labs that he was teaching. And he was really, really instrumental in me getting to know a lot of people in the field. And the other thing that was important that I learned from him was to treat every human being with respect. And Alan really treated everybody from the biggest donor to the newest staff member exactly the same. And then, as I mentioned previously, never miss an opportunity to teach. And he also taught me the joy of giving back. He taught me in this photo that everybody is smiling. Now, Alan's passion was third world international outreach. And although I do thank him for inviting me into this world. There are so many ways to give back in our communities, countless ways of giving back. It does not have to be third world medicine. But I was so thrilled that he did include me in this world. And that's probably how I will remember Alan best. This is in Guatemala. He's got two tables set up ready to go, one microscope ready to swing between the two tables. And he's the first person in the room sitting there, got glound and wondering where the patients are. And then in the second picture, still after all these years teaching me to do the hard cases. In this case, it was a Mayan woman with a small eye rock hard cataract and pseudo exfoliation, and a microscope that didn't seem to focus very well. So I'd also like to thank my other mentors in third world medicine Susan McDonald and Roger furlong I continue to learn a lot from them about international outreach all the time. And a special thanks to, to Susan for involving me and inviting me to become part of I core. In this picture I've included some of my most recent mentees in Tanzania, some of the residents that were working with us back in January of 2020 just pre COVID. And they, they reminded me of the absolute joy of teaching those who are anxious to learn.  I included this picture of a Goni lens because this is something else that I learned from them. We were talking about treating glaucoma in Africa, discussing the possibility of various nicks procedures. And at some point during the conversation, it became clear to me that none of them had Goni lenses. In fact, none of their tendings had Goni lenses. And it was kind of a jaw dropping moment for me to realize that here we were talking about doing angle surgery with people that never even looked in the angle. So they taught me to be so grateful for the amazing access to instruments to technology to all that we have and that I personally have a tendency to sometimes take for granted. I'd like to just reemphasize the lessons that I learned from some of my mentors and mentees, provide ample time for discussion to promote intellectual curiosity. If a mentor is not fulfilling your educational goals, by all means find another who more fully fits your needs, reach out to potential mentors. It's truly an honor to be asked. And don't be afraid to ask for what you need in the relationship. Welcome mentees into your greater family and if appropriate your personal family, and create a great team and respect them. Take every opportunity to promote your mentees career. Hopefully they will pay it forward. Never miss an opportunity to teach, teach, treat every human being with equal respect. If you still courage in your mentees, finding a way to give back brings joy to all involved. Look for groups that offer mutual support. And don't forget help to, don't forget to get help and to delegate. And so I'd like to just finish with this quote. It's from Dr landine. It's it from a head neck surgery journal. It's really a eulogy to, to one of her mentors. There are those who go beyond, go above and beyond, they teach us not only how to be good physicians, but also how to be good people. They share their humanity and teach us how to create moments of joy. I know that my career and truly my life will be shaped by the legacy that my attending has left behind every interaction a mentor has with a trainee, however minute is meaningful. What may seem trivial to you may indeed be monumental to us your giants. So I wish you luck in finding great mentors and silver linings in whatever situation you find yourself in. If you are truly lucky, maybe one of them may end up being one of the best friends of your life. And so I'd like to thank all my mentors. I'd like to thank you the faculty and my friends at Moran for this really incredible honor. And Andy Olson for all the opportunities and support you gave me over the years. Thank you to Elaine Peterson for your help and answering all my emails so promptly. And a special thank you to my family, my parents, my very first mentors who believed in me and supported me in my education. And Sean, who is a naval aviator who is currently deployed. Thank you for trying to keep us all safe. To my daughter Claire, who is a PhD conservation biologist. Thank you for all you do to save our animals and our planet. I could not be more proud of either of them. And of course, last but not least, my husband John, without his love and support for 40 years, none of these experiences would have been possible. Thank you all so much. Jane that was absolutely wonderful. reinforces the notion that made a good choice for alumnus of the year, and that we should continue train residents and fellows. And we're awfully glad to have you back in the area. It's a good thing. Are there questions for Jane. Just just a whole lot of comments in the chat Jane make sure you see him. The comments are good and that was absolutely what we needed. This is great. Now, we're at a point where we're going to break for lunch for about 30 minutes. There are some thank yous though that I want to make sure we get out. And I want to make sure everyone knows that you need to come back after you grab something to eat, because our residents are going to tell us all about their quality improvement projects. And I think they have some very exciting things to share. And as far as thanks, Elaine Peterson, Ethan Peterson for the operational aspects of today. It looks like Monica and I are sort of in charge but in actuality Elaine did almost all the work behind the scenes. Ethan is the one who made it so that we could pull off this technical miracle and would have pulled off what would have happened in the auditorium if it were live. And I also want to thank my co-moderator Monica Fleckenstein. It's been great working with her and she's been a huge addition to the team. We have a bunch of research mentors that the residents have leaned on who have given them advice. Among those folks are Brian Stag, Barb Boratsko, Stephen Schmitz-Valkenberg, Monica Fleckenstein, Rachael Stinson, Nick Manlis, Jeff Petty, among others. And if I failed to mention you, my apologies, but that was the list I came up with thinking through this. I think that compared to where we were in the past, the presentations today that we heard were perfectly wonderful, well organized, and I think that the mentorship that our residents have been given has been absolutely outstanding.