The Cavalcade of America sponsored by DuPont, maker of better things for better living through chemistry, presents Shirley Booth in Check Your Heart at Home. One of DuPont's better things for better living is Zeeland Durable Water Repellent. Most of the cloth treated with Zeeland now goes to the armed forces. It goes into field jackets, parkas, and other garments designed to give weather protection and warmth without weight. On the home front, civilian clothing such as cotton snowshoots, jackets, raincoats, and children's play clothes are protected with Zeeland, a product of chemical research. We'd like to preface the announcement of tonight's Cavalcade by reading a telegram to Miss Shirley Booth from Rita Hayworth. Dear Shirley, last week when I listened to Cavalcade, I was pleased as anything when the announcer said, next week our star will be Rita Hayworth. But tonight he's going to say, starring Shirley Booth, thanks to a nasty little germ called influenza. Since it can't be me, I'm glad it's you. Thanks for stepping in, and loads of luck. Signed, Rita Hayworth. DuPont presents Shirley Booth, star of Broadway and Radio, in Check Your Heart at Home. The story of an American girl in uniform, a Red Cross worker overseas. Our play, suggested by Jane Goodell's dramatic new war book They Sent Me to Iceland, was especially written for Cavalcade by Milton Wayne, and stars Shirley Booth as Jennifer Prescott, American Red Cross worker, on the Cavalcade of America. Buffalo, New York. A dressing room in the Empire Theater shortly before midnight, May 1938. A year and a half before the Second World War. Oh, it's good to see you, Mark. So good. Well, Iron Man, break down and tell me, what are you doing in Buffalo? I came to see the show. On the last night of a road tour? Yeah, I'm a radical that way. Most people want to be first-nighters. Me? I always go on the last night. Very interesting, Mr. Grayson. And after the show? After the show? I call on the leading ladies, brilliant on the study, and take her home. To Browning Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. New York's my next stop. I thought the Broadway season was finished. The summer theater offered me a job, I'm taking it. So it's still a career you're after, huh? It hasn't been much of a one so far. The breaks don't happen like in a movie.  When I left the house to come here, the kids in the corner were playing Oyster Greensale. Oyster Greensale. Our old battle cry. Yeah. I thought it was a good omen. I'm sorry, Mark. Jen, what's to stop us? We could be married this weekend. And I'll be stuck away in a Pennsylvania Bond theater in you and a Boston law office?  How long do you expect to wait for what you call the breaks? As long as I can. I've got to find out if I'm right about myself on the stage.  Jen, have you read beyond the theater pages lately? Still a serious political young man, eh? Yeah. Well, there's a kind of politics nowadays that may crimp our lives. Europe's festering with it. If that poison breaks out, Jen will drench the world. Now's the time for us to be together. We can still call our shots. All right. Then I've called my shot. And with my heart, I'm knocking on wood. New York City. Two weeks after Pearl Harbor. I got the job. Peg, I got the job. Well, Jen, the one with the guild. No, this is a different kind of show. I've signed up with the Red Cross. You? What are you going to do? Recreation work in the camps. You'll never see your name in lights that way. I've torn up that dream. I've got a job now. Period. I guess it's okay if that's what you want. But what if Mark should suddenly show up again? After all this time? No, Peg. There's nothing to tie me down. Any idea where you'll be stationed? Fort Belvoir, Virginia. I'm leaving tomorrow. Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Six weeks later. Jennifer Prescott speaking. Miss Prescott, this is Red Cross Headquarters, Washington. Will you go to Iceland? Iceland? Name the day in the boat. I'll be there. Ten five boats for Ganeshaw. Ten five boats for Ganeshaw. Oh, big pardon, Miss Prescott. Yes? Red Cross unit will go ashore in number three boat. We'll be ready, Stuart. Thank you, Miss. Those lads are sure aching to get sight of girls from home. You've been here before? This is my fourth convoy trip, Miss. What's this country like? Iceland's a rugged old boot. Always smelling of fish. Like the fellow says, it's okay for the visit. Does the sun ever shine here? Why, yes, Miss. Of course it goes up and down, sudden like. But sometimes you get as much as ten hours on it. A day? Now, Miss, a week. Oh, well, probably at least you won't have to worry about getting freckles. Iceland? Here we come. There's stirrups on these landing boats. The sun. Look, girls, the sun. Oh, go on, it's just a mirage. They say that's a very good sun, Carrie. Well, I'm getting scared. I'm scared, Alice. What of? That mob of soldiers there on the dock looks like a whole regiment. Just a schoolgirl's preview of heaven. It's funny, though. What? Well, they're just standing and watching us come in. They're not saying a word. Maybe they think we're a military secret. Well, we'll soon find out. Don't have to worry about submarines anymore. Yeah, it's land all right, but my legs don't know it yet. Alice, did you see my bag? They're bringing it up now, Paula. Just a minute, ladies. Would you mind stepping this way, please? We'd like to take a few pictures. Certainly.  No, soldier, I guess that's all. I count 11. What'd you make it? Ditto. Check. Mamma mia, they're real. They're real women. What do you say, Pete? You think they are, huh? Oh, you're nuts.  That's what I heard. Sure, sure. You got a private wire. Here they come. Let's find out. Oh, thank you. Excuse me, miss. Sure, soldier. What's on your mind? Are you, uh... Are you chorus, girls? No. Oh. And I'm just as sorry as you are. Oh, I get it. You're Red Cross nurses. Yeah, sure, sure. Just like it says in all imposters, sisters are moissy, right? Well, we're sort of distant relatives. I get it. He ain't got your diplomas yet. No, soldier. We're Red Cross recreation workers. Recreation? Yeah, what'd she say? Oh, quiet, you guys. Pipe down, what is it? Well, you see, we're going to get up a program of entertainment and recreation. Canteens and club rooms for all you men. Well, what's the matter? Don't you like the idea? Sure, miss. Sounds swell. But what? I guess you're in the wrong compartment, is all. We're just GI soldiers. What do you mean by that? Well, he don't mean nothing personal, ma'am. It's just that what you're fixing don't sound real, is nothing like that's happened since we're here. Well, soldier, here's where a new day breaks for the GI Iceland. Well, girls, this is Home Sweet Home. By orders of the general, this brand new quonset hut is all yours. This joint makes me feel right homesick. Looks like a hunk of the New York subway with a tin roof and a pot-bellied stove. You're lucky at that. The old huts we nurses have are just upside-down foxholes. Well, I guess I'm much long. Thanks for everything, Lieutenant. You've been very kind. Oh, look here, Miss Prescott. You think there's something off the beam about us up here, don't you? Well, we're all pretty tired. I'm really sorry if I gave you that impression. Oh, it's not only you. I noticed all of you at mess tonight. The way you stared at us, the way you reacted to some of the things we said. I assure you, Lieutenant, we had no idea. You see, we heard you were the first Red Cross outfit overseas and we tried to give you a few tips on what you'll be up against here. I guess we just overdid it. Is Iceland so different from other war zones? For the men, it's one of the toughest spots there is. Nothing happens here. Their only job is to see that nothing does. And all they can do is wait. And that's why they were so excited when the Red Alert sounded. Sure. They hoped it was the real thing for a change. Not just a dry run.  I guess we'll get to be the same way, too. Oh, in a couple of months you'll clutch it anything that'll break the endless chain of boredom, lousy weather, bad roads, terrific winds, and a constant diet of dehydrated chow and rumors.  At the end of 101 days, you'll be full-fledged members of the FBI. The FBI? Yeah. The forgotten babes of Iceland. Well, good night. Sorry I talk so much. Well, that dame's got more gloom than three guys called Tchaikovsky. Well, maybe she's got a right to feel that way. Who says no? But nobody promises to be a shindig at the rainbow room. It's getting cold in here. I move we close discussion for the night. I second the motion. This ex-tenographer's so bush you could sleep on a clothesline. Say, Carrie, that wouldn't be a bad act for one of our shows. Before you go into it. I'll torch you to see who turns out to lie. Did you say striker? Why bother us about it in the middle of the night? Go see your labor board. Fire duty. I've got to tend your fire. Oh, good heavens. It's only the stalker. Jen, let a man. Why didn't he say so right off? Just a minute. I guess you didn't know it. But I have to tend your fires all night long. Joe's the name. Say, ma'am, where is she? Who? Honest, I won't disturb her. Just one look, please. Okay, name her. Ginger. Ginger? Ginger Rogers. She came in on the convoy. Somebody gave you a bum stare, soldier.  Sorry, Joe. Well, four months now I've been sweating it out. Well, maybe it'll happen one of these days. Sure. The guys got to have something to look forward to. Oh, well. Guess I'll fix your stove. Is that your job? Yes, ma'am. I look at the stove for the officers and nurses. Oh, air conditioning engineer, eh? Oh, no, no, ma'am. I'm with the medical corps. All night long, one stove after another. It's a very solitary kind of business. Say, like, yeah, I'd like to think about the girl back in Peoria. But she never wrote me one letter even. I guess she ain't so crazy about me. Eh, now you'll be nice and warm till morning. Thanks, Joe. Oh, I was so excited. I forgot to tell you before. Welcome to Iceland, ma'am. Jan, you're still awake. Anything wrong, baby? Something's happened to me out here, Carrie. It happened so fast I'm a little dizzy. Take it easy. Just the excitement of a new place, a new job. Oh, I've been to a lot of places. I've had a few jobs outside the theatre, but this is something else. For the first time, I feel smaller than my job. It just doesn't make sense. What do you mean? Well, maybe I'm just about in skiing. You can tell me so. I'm listening. But you're young and pretty, Jan. Why are you here? There's work I can do. Work that means something. Plus a little personal job of escape? Trying to forget? No. No, that part's over now. Don't kid yourself. Never is. Gal lose boy?  I know what you're thinking, Carrie, but whatever was with me, it'll have nothing to do with the job.  You'll do all right. Just remember, it'll take times to get things going here. But the men expect so much of us. Oh, nonsense. All they expect is a handy combination of Florence Nightingale, Dorothy Dix, and Gypsy Rose Lee. In my book, that's just a minor league miracle. You're listening to a romantic comedy, Check Your Heart At Home, starring Shirley Booth as Jennifer Prescott, a Red Cross worker. Presented on the Cavalcade of America by DuPing's For Better Living Through Chemistry. As our play continues, the Red Cross workers in groups of twos and threes have been traveling across the winter desolation of Iceland, bringing entertainment and the touch of home to the enlisted men. In one of the small and distant camps, a dance has been arranged. When Red Cross headquarters is notified at the last moment, only Jennifer Prescott and Carrie Manning are available. And now they face that problem of sad mathematics, a dance to women and 70 men. Oh, gee. It's sure good to be dancing with an American girl again. Sure is. Sorry, bud. Oh, wait, wait. We haven't taken three steps. Give me a break. Oh, no. I've been waiting a long time. Where? Where do you come from, miss? Massachusetts. Yeah? I'm Pennsylvania.  Here is Stuckey, the dive bomber, but a blonde you take into a dive. I'm learning fast and furious. Come on, give up. Next, next. This ain't no cutting, soldier. You got a monopoly.  Let's go, miss. While they argue, we'll dance. Oh, no, that's not good. Say, I here tell there's a country called America, and they got trees there. I'll swear to that. Time's up, bud. Oh, look, fella, I ain't danced for five months. Tell it to your relief investigator. Say something to me, miss. Say something to that sweet female American toss. This is one of the best dances I've ever been to. It's a very polite sentiment, miss. No, I meant it. Well, what's the difference? Say more. You sound nice. Nice like an angel singing the blues. Air regional, local air regional. Docs are going too? Seems like they double in cannon. What now? Oh, sergeant. Yes, miss. What do the rest of you men do? We stay right here unless it's the business. Well, that may be the rest of the night. Well, let's keep this going. Who's the singer in this outfit? Blenny. Blenny? Hand me my guitar, bud. What's your mood, boys? Sleep after that jam session. Well, this office is the only place I can put you. I've sent for a couple of cots. That's very good of you, Lieutenant. Is there some way we can notify the girls in Reykjavik that we're staying? Well, I've already taken care of that, miss Prescott. I'll have a man drive you back first thing in the morning. Oh, you can me make it the eighth or the ninth thing. It'll be okay with me. Come in. Good work, sergeant. Sorry you had to miss the dance. What's wrong, sergeant? Oyster green sale. Mark. Mark Grayston. Jenny Prescott. The red-headed terror of Browning Street. Oyster green sale. Gosh. Three years, Jen. Oh, Lieutenant, there's some military strategy I'd like to discuss with you in progress. Oh, uh, yes, Miss Bandinger. Certainly. You look different, Jenny. Nothing that a good night's rest in a facial will help. It's deeper than that. You're Jenny again. Three years is a long time. It could have been a small lifetime for us. Why didn't we get married then? Why? Was there any reason that made sense? I wanted a career more than anything, I thought. That fever's burned out now. All I wanted was a place of my own and a girl with red hair. I still do. Mark, this shouldn't have happened now and here. I could have waited. I have a 99-year lease on you, remember? It's just another place and another time. I'd be off with you in a minute. Oh, Jenny, come on. Jenny, wake up. What do you want most? Be honest. Right now, I want to do the job I came here for. All right. I have my job, too. It's our life I'm talking about. Mark, please try to understand. While I'm here, I've got to belong 100% to all these men and not a bit to any one man. Otherwise, I can't do it. I guess I checked my heart at home. Mine's been in storage for a long time. I'm going back to Reykjavik in the morning. We're rehearsing our first big show to tour the camps. We'll be coming up this way. And I don't see you before then? Mark, let me do this, chow. Oh, yeah. Yeah, I just remembered. I won't be around to stop you. What do you mean? I've been recommended for office at school. I expect to sail for home almost any day. You couldn't have arranged it better yourself. What's the matter? Nothing. It works out fine. Just fine. But I don't have to like it, do I? What again?  Give him a bank account, boogie woogie number. I didn't expect to see you so soon. Are you going to stay for the show? No, I'm on my way to the dock. We sail in 25 minutes. Will you be coming back here? I don't know. It might send me any place. England, Africa, India. Maybe another three years. We don't have a say anymore. We're not calling our own shots. Mark, let's not lose touch again. Oh, they're waiting for me. They're lucky. What horn do I blow when I need you? Goodbye, Jenny. Until our hearts come out of storage. So long, Mark. It's a green sail. Oh, it's a green sail. Cup, will you, Jen? Yes, I'll be with you in a minute. George, who worked the curtain tonight? Okay, Miss Prescott. There'll be someone here to tell us. Well, that's it, all right. Real thing this time. It's crowding up, our soldier. Sounds like they're after harbor. How do you know that? I just said it sounds like it. Who's in charge back here? Hi, I'm Captain. Start the show as soon as you can. Is it the harbor, Captain? Yes, Miss Prescott. Just a minute. The convoy. Did he get out? I think so, but we can't be sure. I'll send word as soon as we know. Jenny, I feel like I'm coming apart at the seams. Easy, baby. Oh, I'll be all right. Did you call Polly? Here I am. Stand by. Kill the house lights, Corporal. Check. Flash the orchestra. Check. Here's your hat, James. Thanks, old Seth. Right. Shirley Booth. To the gallant, self-sacrificing women at home and abroad, who bring cheer and comfort and smiles to the men in uniform, DuPont sends its good wishes and hearty thanks. Miss Booth will return in a few moments. Meanwhile, here is Clayton Collier to tell you how research continues to improve X-ray equipment, making it more useful to doctors at the front. Saving lives in the Army, in the Navy, is the wartime duty of X-rays. Light, portable X-ray machines that can be set up in less than five minutes in the field and taken right up to the battle front. Using these X-ray units, a surgeon rarely needs to probe blindly for the bullets or shrapnel that have wounded a man. Metal fragments are located in a few seconds, and even the depth at which they are embedded is accurately calculated. The X-rays that pass so easily through a man's body are not like the rays of ordinary light, but they must be turned into light rays before the human eye can see them. Fortunately, certain chemicals do just that. X-rays into light rays. This is the principle of the fluoroscopic screen with which the doctor looks at your chest or your back when you go to him for an examination. The invisible X-rays after passing through your body strike against the screen. The screen glows, revealing a brilliant green and yellow shadow picture of your heart or your lungs. Using such a screen, a bullet or shell fragment can frequently be located in a matter of seconds. But in many cases, as you know, X-ray photographs are necessary. For this purpose, another type of X-ray screen, the intensifying screen has been developed. Such screens turn X-rays into light rays of just the right color, blue, to register the sharpest, clearest picture on an X-ray film. Thus, intensifying screens make it possible to take X-ray snapshots and get the clear-cut X-ray photographs needed for a correct diagnosis. American scientists have played a leading part in the development of X-rays and X-ray screens. Thomas Edison, for instance, did much to improve them. And the forerunners of today's highly effective X-ray screens were developed by Carl V. S. Patterson, another American experimenting in his home laboratory. For years, the story of his organization, the Patterson Screen Company, has been an example of science and industry working together to bring better health to the American family. Today, as the Patterson Screen Division of the DuPont Photo Products Department, the Patterson Organization is combining its skill in research and development with that of DuPont, for the continued improvement of these better things for better living through chemistry. And here is Shirley Booth, star of this evening's cavalcade. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. I know we all think that there's nothing within reason we wouldn't do for the men and women in service who are lonely, away from home this Christmas. But how many of us really mean it when it happens to interfere with our own little pleasures? For instance, are you willing to stay at home this Christmas so that a service man or woman can have a furlough with his family? Or will you travel as usual and condemn some service man to spend the holidays and camp? The transportation shortage is as critical as that. If you travel, some service man doesn't. There just aren't enough seats on trains and buses and Pullmans or diners this Christmas. There won't be until after the New Year. Won't you let the service people and transportation facilities there are? Thank you. For a Tültide broadcast next Monday evening, cavalcade will present that great star of the feather, Helen Hayes, with Philip Meraville, in a play which seems destined to become America's great Christmas classic, Stephen Vincent Bonet's A Child Is Born. This reverent and inspiring play, especially written for cavalcade, was so widely acclaimed last year as a moving drama of great power that DuPont again presents it on this America's third wartime Christmas. Because it uniquely relates the Christmas story to a war-torn world. It's the timeless story of the Christmas birth in Judea with a special meaning for today. For a Christmas message of hope and goodwill for all peoples whom tyrants would oppress, DuPont invites you to hear Helen Hayes with Philip Meraville in a special Christmas broadcast next Monday evening of Stephen Vincent Bonet's magnificent Christmas play, A Child Is Born. Presented with an augmented orchestra and chorus on the cavalcade of America. Cavalcade is pleased to remind its audience that Miss Shirley Booth, tonight's star, is currently appearing in the Broadway hit Tomorrow the World. The orchestra and musical score this evening were under the direction of Donald Voorhees. This is Karl Frank sending best wishes from cavalcade sponsor the DuPont Company of Wilmington, Delaware. This is the National Broadcasting Company.


Hello and welcome to the session. In this session we discuss the following question which says, if 6 men or 5 women can earn Rs 900 per day, how much would 10 men and 10 women earn per day? Before moving on to the solution, let's see when are two quantities x and y in direct proportion? x and y are said to be in direct proportion if they increase or decrease together in such a manner that the ratio of the corresponding values remains constant. That is if x upon y is equal to k, where k is a positive number, then we say x and y are in direct proportion. And if we have that y and y2 are the values of y corresponding to the values x1, x2 of x respectively, then we have x1 upon y1 is equal to x2 upon y2. This is the key idea to be used for this question. Now let's proceed with the solution. Now we need to find how much would 10 men and 10 women earn per day? So we take let 10 men earn Rs x per day and let 10 women earn Rs y per day. Now consider this table in which we have number of men and their earnings per day in rupees. Now in the question we have that 6 men earn Rs 900 per day. So we write here 6 that is when number of men are 6, their earnings per day is Rs 900 and we need to find the earnings per day of 10 men. So when number of men are 10, we have their earnings per day would be x as we have assumed it to be x. Now more the number of men, more would be their earnings per day. So we have that the number of men, their earnings directly proportional to each other. So this would mean 6 upon 900 is equal to 10 upon x. So from here we get x is equal to 900 into 10 upon 6. Now 6, 150 times is 900 and so this is equal to 1500. Thus we get earnings of 10 men is equal to Rs 1500. Now consider this table with number of women and earnings per day. Now in the question we have that 5 women earn Rs 900 per day. So we write here in the given table for women, then we have 5 women then their earnings per day is Rs 900 and when we have 10 women we have assumed their earnings to be y. Now in the same way as the number of men and their earnings per day were in direct proportion, here the number of women and earnings per day are also in direct proportion. So we have 5 upon 900 is equal to 10 upon y and this would give us y is equal to 10 into 900 upon 5. 5, 2 times is 10 and this is equal to 1800. Thus we get earnings per day of 10 women is equal to Rs 1800. Now hence we have and 10 women Rs 1500 that is earnings per day of 10 men plus earnings per day of 10 women that is 1800 and this is equal to Rs 3300. So 10 men and 10 women earn Rs 3300 per day. Thus our final answer is Rs 3300. So this completes the session. Hope you have understood the solution for this question.


Hi, this is Mary Wisner from the Gallagher Law Library. This lesson is about law review articles. First, what are law reviews or law journals? They are scholarly legal periodicals. Periodicals means that they're published on a schedule, for instance monthly, annually, or four times a year. Scholarly means they're academic, backed up with citations. Law reviews are usually published by law schools and edited by law students. In this way, law reviews are different from journals in most other fields. Law journals are sometimes published by professional organizations or commercial publishers and edited by professors or other professionals. The articles in law reviews tend to be 20 to 80 pages long. They generally start off with an overview of the problem, give some background, critique and analyze the issues, and often end with proposals. They are packed with footnotes, and these footnotes are carefully checked during the editing process to make sure that every citation, every page reference, every quotation is accurate. That makes them great leads for further research. The articles are written by law professors, lawyers, judges and others, and these articles are usually called articles. There are also articles that are written by law students, but most journals set these apart and call them notes or comments so that readers can easily tell that they're written by students rather than professionals. Law schools often publish several journals. It's common to have one that's the flagship law review that publishes articles on many topics, whether it's international law or estate planning, criminal procedure or copyright law, and then specialty journals that focus on specialized areas of law. For example, here at the University of Washington School of Law, we have the Washington Law Review, which has been in publication since the 1920s, and we have three journals on specialized topics. The Washington International Law Journal, the Washington Journal of Environmental Law and Policy, and the Washington Journal of Law, Technology and Arts. Some people wonder about when to say law review and when to say law journal. At many schools, like UW Law, the general publication is called a law review, and the others have journal in their title. But there are exceptions to this. For instance, at Yale, the general review is called the Yale Law Journal, and they have at least one specialty journal that has the word review in the title. You'll also run into things like this. The University of Indiana has two law schools, one in Bloomington and one in Indianapolis. Each has a general interest journal, but the names are different. The Indiana Law Journal from Bloomington and the Indiana Law Review from Indianapolis. It's okay to use the terms interchangeably when you're talking about articles generally. I'm looking for some law review articles about housing segregation, or my professor recommended a law journal article about bargaining power in contracts. When you're citing an article or looking up an article someone else cited, pay attention to the name, because that's how you'll look it up. To recap, law reviews or law journals are scholarly periodicals about the law. In part two, we'll talk about where you can look up journal articles. And then in part three, we'll show you how to search for journal articles on subjects you're interested in. This is Mary Wissner from the Gallagher Law Library. Visit our website for library services, research guides, and more, lib.law.uw.edu.


All right, so we're here to talk about hybrid cloud and the incredible benefit of Linux machines. This is running Fedora, if you're interested in the community version that we're running today in Google Drive. Life is good and Macs are evil, and I will continue to say that. See, this is what happens. So you've heard a lot about hybrid cloud. It came up in the keynotes. There's a lot of sessions that are going on. So I thought we'd kind of set a baseline around hybrid. What got us to where we are today? It started with a lot of cloud washing, and those of you that have been in the industry for a while, remember when everything was called cloud, and this started in about 2006, I mean, in 2008, where it didn't matter what it was, VMware called everything they did cloud, and so there was a lot of confusion in the market of what was actually cloud and what wasn't cloud. And then we had a proliferation of asses, and this continues today. In fact, the session right before this, I saw a new one which was PC as, which is private cloud as a service, which yes, that's what it is. You're delivering private cloud as a hosted managed service, but we really love our asses, and it continues to just confuse the market of what is as a service versus what is cloud versus what is on premises, et cetera. So now we have hybrid washing, where we see a million different solutions in the market that are calling themselves hybrid, and usually that is combined with some element of open, and so you have open source or open standards, and hybrid, and multi-cloud, and all these wonderful terms, and all it has done is confuse the hell out of our customers who are trying to figure out just what kind of infrastructure is right for them as they try to improve operational efficiencies, cut costs, migrate their workloads or whatever it is that they're trying to do to help the business be successful. So what is hybrid cloud? I'll tell you what it's not, and this is what most people define it as. Usually we start talking about hybrid cloud just when we have two clouds. That is interesting, and I think a lot of people are starting to do a multi-cloud strategy where they're looking at multiple clouds within their infrastructure, but really to be hybrid is more than just slapping two clouds together or putting them. There is this concept of some kind of integration or working together harmoniously, and I look at it really from some key criteria or characteristics across the hybrid cloud environment, meaning that whether you have two public clouds or a private and public cloud or we'll talk in a minute about just an on-premise data center and a cloud, there are some things that need to happen across those environments to consider them truly hybrid. Common automation, obviously Ansible is coming out as kind of the standard when it comes to that across different cloud environments. Common orchestration, right? Kubernetes has become the layer that a lot of companies are using across a hybrid cloud environment. Monitoring, management. Policy and governance is really important when you look at hybrid cloud environments, right? Whether it's access control roles to that workload that you have in a hybrid cloud environment or the way that you're giving developers access to certain parts of the infrastructure, but the governance of those cloud environments needs to be consistent. The architecture, and I can tell you this particularly comes up if you've ever tried to do DR in a hybrid cloud environment, which I tried to do from a private cloud to a public cloud and we tried to have the architecture so it was literally a hot, hot situation and it was absolutely impossible at that time. AWS has gotten better, but if you can't do your load balancing the same way, it starts to wreak havoc on the way you're actually trying to do your DR. Security, APIs are critical, so a lot of things need to happen in concert and be consistently applied or governed across those areas to be considered hybrid. So regardless of how you define it, it's happening. So if you start to look what customers are trying to do, whether it be in government or enterprise or telco, they are looking at ways to deploy workloads in a hybrid cloud environment. This particular study was done by IDC and they were asking about what aspects of hybrid cloud have you adopted? And you can see a mix of public and private, multiple external clouds, supporting public workloads with automatic bursting, so lots of different ways that people are making hybrid cloud a reality within their environment. This is some research that we did back in September. It was actually a global research project around virtualization trends, but a lot of cloud trends came out of that too as people are trying to figure out how to align what they're doing today in the data center and move it to the cloud. And you can see in the next couple of years, they're looking a lot of on-premise private, managed private, which seems to be the theme of OpenStack this year is managed and hosted private cloud, public cloud, and platform as a service, which a lot of enterprises start to look just all in the same category. And they're moving very quickly. These were technologies instead of virtualization. So private cloud is probably a little bit higher than you would see in the general universe because these are going into guys that are dealing with the data center today. So I think private cloud becomes kind of a favorite for them. But you can see here instead of virtualization, they're looking at private cloud, they look at containers. So maybe they're just gonna skip over the whole private public and run containers on bare metal or on a virtualized environment. Public cloud is there, and even bare metal instead of virtualization. So why is all this happening? This is a term that we talk a lot about in the industry, digital transformation. Here's the way I think about this. And if you talk to people in enterprises, especially your telcos or even government, this has become kind of a standard term, which is why we use it, because customers get it. It's because everybody is having to transform. And the digital part is just pretty simple. We're overwhelmed with the amount of data that we have to manage, secure, store, process, get information from, whatever we're doing. Our users, whether they be internal or external, want those digital native experiences. And as IT leaders, we have got to deliver digital services. And we're trying to do that as we're changing the way that we do IT. So the transformation is easy. We have to change. It cannot be business as usual. We have to embrace next generation architectures. We have to change the way we're working together, add more DevOps or agile processes, and we need to use cloud native platforms, whether those be private or public or some mix of the two. But the reality is, as we're trying to do all of this cloud native, next generation architecture DevOps containers, we still are living with the reality of 79, 80% of our investments and resources are going to what we have today. And so often, especially at conferences like this, when we're talking about OpenStack and next generation cloud architectures, it's so easy to forget that we still have so much legacy IT that we are trying to manage that is keeping the wheels on the bus, as we like to say. And so the big challenge, and when I talk to customers, this is what we talk about all the time. It's like, how do we start to shift those resources and investment to these next generation platforms, to the cloud, right? So you can move the business forward and you can start to take some of that technical debt out of the way. And at the same time, we really have to show clear business value. So it's not just about innovation or technology for technology's sake, but it's about how can we show that direct business impact, whether it's be just efficiency, productivity, greater agility, but usually it's about time to market. We just have to move faster. And you heard that in all of the customer examples in the keynotes this morning. What was one of those key themes? It was we had to give developers faster access, right? We had to get these applications out faster. We had to be able to scale much faster. So it's always about some kind of faster time to market, which is translating into increased revenue or faster time to market for products or whatever it is that the business needs. So the other thing is that we need to remember it still very early. So when we're talking about hybrid cloud and multi-cloud and all of these different ideas and ways that we can move to the next generation, 52% of this particular base of research that we did globally, still had not figured out their cloud strategy. And I will tell you, it's really interesting when you're talking to customers, especially I tend to talk more to CIO level and you start asking them about their strategy. I talked to four customers last week in Nashville, Tennessee and all four said we are gonna put everything in the public cloud within the next five years. And I said, interesting, how are you gonna do that? How are you thinking about that? And you realize that that mandate has become what they think is a pure cost savings mandate, but there isn't a strategy really behind it. They just think that's what they're supposed to do and that's what they're hearing that everyone else is doing. And when you start just asking some basic questions like how are you thinking about your legacy workloads in public cloud? How are you thinking about disaster recovery? How are you thinking about security and compliance? What are you doing with your regulations today? How are you thinking about blah, blah, blah? Like you just ask them four or five questions and the whole thing kind of falls apart, right? Because they haven't really figured out what that means from an implementation standpoint. So I think we need to be careful. When we look at public cloud and we look at the success of OpenStack, it's not gonna be one or the other and that's why hybrid becomes such an important conversation. Because you've gotta look at the workloads and what is the most relevant infrastructure for that workload and I wanna talk about that more. Because at the end of the day what we should be talking about is hybrid IT, not hybrid cloud. Because everything is not gonna go into the cloud. There is going to be on-premises infrastructure whether it's your own or someone else's.  We have a lot of infrastructure on-premise still. Sorry that was only one, I promised I wouldn't do too many. And so what we need to think about is when we look across our applications whether those be legacy or net new applications how do we think about the infrastructure that we should put that on? Whether it's physical, virtual, private or public cloud and what hybrid allows us to do is to be thinking about it as a bridge. So some things we may just go to public cloud, that's great and that may be very good for some web applications or for some things that are not mission critical or things we've gotta get done really, really fast. We just do not have time to stand up the infrastructure for our developers on-premise or in a private cloud. So it's all about looking at the workload and choosing the best infrastructure. And so how do we do that? And this is something I've been thinking a lot about because this is probably the way most conversations that I am having with customers today are leading to because we keep starting with the infrastructure. We love to talk about infrastructure and I love talking about infrastructure more than most people but the problem with that is that we're not thinking about the workload, we're not thinking about the use case, we're just thinking about the pipes. And so how do we up-level that conversation and say, okay, let's start with the application, what do we need to be successful? And we need to be okay if the answer isn't open stack. Maybe it's just virtualization. Or maybe it is public cloud. I don't know, but the problem is we keep trying to shove the infrastructure first and not thinking about what's right for that application. So these are just some of the criteria that I've been talking about with some customers and thinking about as I try to figure out how do we do a better job of thinking about the characteristics of that workload and what would be the right answer whether it be one cloud, two clouds, on-premise, whatever it is and kind of change the conversation. So if you're looking at your own organization or if you're a vendor, think about this in a different way. Instead of starting with the open stack conversation, start with the application, start with what they're trying to do for the business and back into open stack, which may or may not be the right answer. If it's a highly scalable application that they've got to really roll out globally, open stack might be the right answer, but it might not. So these are just some things to think about. And I like giving this example. This is a financial services customer that we worked with that I can't name but I kind of genericize their journey. And there's a couple of things I liked about this example. One is that they really are thinking about it in an incremental journey perspective. They're not saying, okay, our vision is this, everything's containerized, strategic hybrid cloud, go. Which we know is not the way it happens. And what they did is they actually looked at their existing infrastructure and workloads and said, are we even fully standardized? Are we fully automated? And the reality was no, they still had some mainframes. They still had some old OSs. They had like five or six flavors of OSs. So can we just get to an SOE so that we can start thinking about how to move beyond that? And they looked at their virtualized infrastructure and they had multiple hyper-Vs going, but they were looking at it very tactically. And they thought, should we be looking at virtualization more strategically? And they started looking at KVM and how that might provide a common fabric as they started thinking about going to the cloud. So at each step along the way, they would test stuff. They would look at that environment and say, okay, is this tactical? Is this strategic? Are we using this in the right way? Are we fully optimized? Are we standardized? And literally throughout their entire infrastructure started to think about that. And then they looked at the processes and they looked at how they were working with the business and how the developers were working together with the ops teams. And they started to bring more DevOps processes to their IT department. And bring in more automation because they still had a ton of manual processes. So you can see all along the way, they started to look at cloud. And what I love about this is they tested both. And so they're a big OpenStack customer now, huge OpenStack deployment, but they also looked at public cloud. And they tested both. And they did a huge OpenStack POC. They weren't sold on either. But when it came down to it, what they decided to do for them, and this is a financial services, so highly regulated, it's in Europe. It's a lot of data sovereignty issues as well. They looked at public cloud as being what they're calling tactical. That's not to say that they're not putting a lot of things in the public cloud, but they're not looking at it as mission critical or things that would be potentially against compliance or regulatory issues. But they're using it a lot, especially for internal apps and things they've got to move very quickly. Then they tested OpenStack, as I said, and they decided to make OpenStack their strategic private cloud infrastructure. And so they are slowly moving to this what they're calling strategic hybrid cloud with everything containerized. So now they're using some OpenShift. They're starting to play with Kubernetes, starting to containerize both legacy apps and moving them forward, as well as letting their developers play with net new applications using containers. And so lots of ways to do this, this is not necessarily the right road map for every company, but what you can take from this is that incremental steps and the fact that they looked at each area to figure out, am I fully optimized there? Am I thinking about this in the right way? And they had a vision where they wanted to be. And you can see it is not 100% in the public cloud. So how are customers thinking about these hybrid IT environments? This was a big piece of research we did with OpenStack users specifically. And are you planning to use OpenStack in other environments? So workloads, they're currently running on OpenStack. How are they thinking about that from a hybrid perspective? And as you can see, there's a lot of different environments both on-premise as well as public cloud. 30% said, yeah, I'm gonna run my OpenStack workloads also in the public cloud. So customers are absolutely thinking about this hybrid environment. And 28% traditional virtualization. And it's funny, because so often when something new comes around, we think that it completely displaces the thing behind it. I can't tell you how many salespeople in our organization, when containers became the hot new thing, they're like, oh, we have containers, we don't need OpenStack anymore. Or we have OpenStack, we don't need virtualization anymore. And it's just like, guys, there's a roadmap for everything and there's some way that it's relevant depending on what the customer is trying to do. So we've gotta be careful not to get too hyped into the next thing and totally throw away things that are still working fine. So just quickly about Red Hat, I'm not gonna go into products at all because I don't think we're here to do product pitches. You can go to our booth to hear that. But the way we're thinking about this is Open Hybrid Cloud. And the way I think about that is just open, secure throughout, and importantly interoperable. And really how we're leveraging the same open APIs with our partners, with our customers, within our own internal engineering, there is no difference in how we integrate across our own stuff and how we integrate with our partners or customers if they're using a very heterogeneous environment, which is every enterprise customer that we deal with, right? Across those different footprints. And importantly at the management layer. And I think this is where Hybrid Cloud really starts to differentiate in terms of how you are automating, how you're managing, whether it's with a cloud management platform or just how you're providing that common management layer and it goes back to that compliance, that governance, right? Common access and how we're able to maintain that control in a very complex environment. And I just wanted to show this, we talked about containers and how we're really thinking about it and why I think it's important. I kind of like the fact this is building blocks because it really could be, take out the red hat piece and plug in the partner piece. And with public cloud it is all partners. And so how you think about containers, Kubernetes as that common layer, like I talked about, we're looking at OpenShift as our Kubernetes implementation with management on top and other things, whether it be stuff storage, whether from the community or using red hats or other highly distributed storage system. And obviously you need an OS underneath that since containers are an OS technology but really thinking about it holistically in these different building blocks that can come together. And this is a very common combination. And I think that the combination of, when we're looking at containers, Kubernetes and Linux running on OpenStack, which obviously also requires Linux, really starts to provide a powerful combination for customers when they're thinking about the combination of their applications and their infrastructure and a whole DevOps process and how to bring that together. And from a consulting perspective, this is something that's becoming very, very common. We've built out a very large services organization. We work with a lot of partners like Accenture and different things as well. But this is one of the things that we provide both from a cloud migration, but we also have something called the discovery session which is literally a free session that we work with you and try to identify where you wanna go with the cloud. And so it's really helpful if you are trying to figure out your strategy, if you are trying to figure out how to move forward, it's a great service that we provide for our customers. And of course, we have a lot of partners that we work with across the hybrid cloud environment. So just quickly to close, I do believe that when you're starting to look at this very complex hybrid environment, that the value that Red Hat brings is that everything from the physical, virtual, private cloud working with our public cloud partners, we made a huge announcement with AWS last week at our Red Hat Summit, which brings us even closer together with that. We already worked very, very closely with Microsoft and Azure as well as Google Cloud, IBM, SoftBank, SoftLayer, SoftBank, SoftLayer and also BlueMix in the session before this talking about they're using our open stack for a managed private cloud. So really working across the ecosystem, whatever vendors you work with, however you wanna do that, we play nice with others. But we do have those common layers and technologies that you can use throughout and really enabling you to have that hybrid cloud journey. So I would welcome you to come talk to us, like I said in our booth, there's a bunch of Red Hatters here as well. And if anyone has any questions, just let me know. And thank you very much. And thanks for your patience with our technical difficulties.


Yeah, my colleague is just uploading the presentation. Yes, we see the presentation. Okay, that's perfect. Should I start then? Yes, please. Okay, perfect. Okay, yeah, my name already mentioned is Daniel Otto. I'm from the so-called Learning Lab at the University of Duisburg, as in Germany. And I'm here with my colleagues, Daniel Dietman and Nadine Schroeder. And we're all part of a research project we are currently doing at the Learning Lab, which is dedicated to OER, and especially to a federal infrastructure concerning OER. And when we started this research project, we were very much interested in becoming a good overview about what is actually the status of the research about OER. And we were not so much interested in research on the conceptual or theoretical level. We were more interested on what's really there in empirical terms. So what is really the status of the empirical studies that are done all over the world and that are published in academic journals. And this is why we started to establish so-called mapping of this empirical research by using a systematic mapping approach. My colleague will tell you more about how we actually accomplished that. And if you go to the next slide, we can just see that we were guided by three major questions for systematic mapping. First of all, we wanted to know in empirical terms, what are the predominant thematic focuses of OER research? So what is the research really concentrated on? The second question was which are the research methods that are used in these studies, for example, the surveys or interpretation of data or qualitative studies. So that was also in our interest. The third aspect was the prevalence. Because we've done this worldwide, the prevalence of the studies and concerning the educational sectors, for example, whether many studies in the sector of school, higher education, vocational education. And also the question in which countries do most research, empirical research on who we are. Yes, so this was where we started. And my colleague Nadine, which I'm going to hand over, will tell you more about how we done this on a methodological basis. Yes, I give you an insight into our methodological procedure. We followed a systematic mapping approach to present the empirical studies on OER as complete as possible. But it's not in depth analysis, but an overview of the literature and on certain topics to identify trends and gaps in the OER research landscape. As criteria for searching relevant publications, we defined, first of all, publications of the last five years to reflect most current studies. And peer-reviewed journal articles in English to get an international perspective. With these limitations, we searched Web of Science, Scopus, and Eric using the keyword open educational resources across all fields. After reducing duplicates, we got such results of 550 publications. And these were part of our first screening process. And then we excluded publications which either didn't represent empirical studies or where the primary focus was not OER. So finally, we got 272 publications, which we included into a detailed analysis. And we assigned these studies to categories on the basis of a category scheme. On the scheme, we developed and validated collaboratively. And these categories include both formal and content-related levels. And based on these categories, we evaluated the frequencies to get a systematic map. So in the following, we would like to present some selected findings. The distribution of the studies by continents show that more than a third of the studies are located in North America, especially USA. And studies from Europe and Asia follow. And in contrast, studies from South America and Africa are less represented. And for 14 publications, no clear position could be identified. And 21 studies were conducted on more than one continent. Next one, please. Thank you, Nadine. Anne, it's your turn. Sorry, I'm not yet. So the educational area in which the studies were conducted showed the higher education sector is predominant with more than 70% followed by the school sector. And cross-educational research could be included in about 13% of the studies. So we can say plays a quite important role as well. So now it's your turn, Daniel, to continue with further results. Okay, Nadine, now I can say thank you. Yeah, first I'd like to show you what research methods were used in our empirical studies. The figure you can see here reveals that quantitative methods can be located at the highest level with just under 63% while qualitative methods account for a relatively small share of 20% and are at a similar level to mixed method approaches with a share of 70%. And when we have a deeper look at the methods, it becomes clear that the quantitative area consists mainly of surveys and data analysis and that interviews and interpretative studies predominate the qualitative studies. Another really important category for us is called research focus and this category, it was possible for us within the mapping process to classify studies into more than just one subcategory. You can see the subcategories here because within individual studies, we could often identify several goals and research interests. And in this category, it's very interesting that almost 30% of the studies could be assigned to the category use adoption and this subcategory contains studies that talk about the use of OER in learning contexts, for example, about the creation, the adaption and the sharing of materials within learning contexts. Another big subcategory is the category perception and attitude, which applied about 18% of our studies we examined. This category very often the teacher's attitude towards OER and their perception of OER were surveyed. And furthermore, one interesting outcome is almost 12% of the studies could be assigned to a category called learning outcomes. These studies often compared the extent to which learning outcomes that were achieved with OER differed from learning outcomes based on the use of conventional teaching materials. And in this context, we found several studies, especially from the US American region that are worth mentioning because they all investigate the use of open textbooks and their comparative cost advantages compared to classical educational materials. And this research focus seems to be understandable against or for us was understandable against the background that in contrast, for example, to Germany, where the prices for educational materials are moderate or low, we are often used in many countries to reduce the costs of education, especially in the USA, such studies can be located with a focus on the university context. Furthermore, 11% of the studies could be assigned to the category effectiveness. Here, the focus is not on effectiveness in terms of learning outcomes, but on aspects such as cost or time efficiency. And a last interesting aspect I want to mention right now can be seen when looking at the categories technical infrastructure or strategy. This includes studies that focus on strategic aspects. It's therefore not only mainly a question of how we are created or perceived, rather the focus of this type of study is how the environments and requirements for this are created on a structural level or how systematic implementation strategies or policies are developed or implemented, taken into account not only learners and teachers on an individual level, but also other actors such as technical support, libraries, non-teaching staff. Another category of our systematic mapping consists in the main contribution of the studies. And interesting results can also be seen when looking at this category, which you can see in this figure, because the figure clearly shows that the majority of the studies we investigated almost 80% are focused on the evaluation of implemented OER projects, measures or interventions. And in contrast, there are hardly any contributions that intend to develop concrete action recommendations, for example, for teachers for dealing with OER or that contribute to the development or theory building for OER or have several implementation strategies, you can say. And that's a point that will lead us to the conclusions. And that's something that Daniel Otto again will talk about now. Yes, sure. Thank you very much for this fast ride through all of our data. I mean, we were only able to show some aspects of the data and if you have more questions, you can of course ask or post them into the chat, because there was also a question about scientific disciplines. And I think we also have some findings about that. But first of all, I mean, we try to provide a basis which could serve as an agenda or which could deliver some points for future empirical research. And as already mentioned by Daniel and Nadine, what we can see is that most of the studies hardly can be or there can be hardly seen any theoretical foundations of many study designs. And this is something that is in particular true for our scientific discipline, which is technology-based learning. Most of the studies are survey-based. So they're sometimes reflecting personal experience of the course that was done, but there's hardly any theoretical basis. So to go through this data is more or less often surveys that have been done on a classical level. And this is a bit unfortunate because this hinders a bit more systematic and validating findings of various studies. For example, concentrating just on the replication, for example, of one study from another researcher. And also it's complicated to identify kind of explanatory variables that we could identify, for example, for the adoption of OER or for the use of OER that would be also interesting. Another field we can see where research is needed is the usability and user friendliness of OER repositories. And I think a lot of repositories are set up all over the world, so it would be very desirable to know more about that, how we can increase the usability of this repository so that individuals can download or upload material. Another last aspect I would like to mention, I guess there are a lot of different aspects that we could consider, especially the effects of the use of OER on pedagogical approaches. And I think this is especially important for concepts such as open pedagogy and also the effects on established educational practices. We're talking about open educational practices where there's an intensive debate on a conceptual level, but we find few empirical studies that test these assumptions about OEP or OP, and I think this would also be desirable. I think there are some studies which came up last year, maybe next year, but these are only a few compared to all the other studies we have so far. Okay, I think that's it. It was about 15 minutes, we were comparatively fast because we wanted to take some questions or comments. Yeah, we have one question from Yan Wang, who asked if you see any differences in the... I'm sorry, I'm... In the scientific disciplines? Yes. I don't know, maybe Nadine or Daniel can say something about that. I think that's something that has yet to be to investigate it. So right now we just prepared the categories we showed you now and some others, but we didn't... Until now, we didn't go deeper and look whether we could see differences between the educational sectors of the disciplines. That's something we will do in the future, but not right now. Joey? We can maybe state that none of the scientific disciplines are predominant. So we can see that most of the studies are doing cross-educational, a significant amount of the studies. Yeah, you can see that here. So this is... which can be assigned to one single discipline. So often there is no discipline mentioned or they have been done across disciplines. And you can say that we have... Thanks for the slide. We have like 24% of humanities and social science. That might be because educational science is in it. But yeah. And we have another interesting question from Joshua. I've been thinking about how one could compare the effectiveness of commercial material with OER when much of the commercial material is found by students on the web. Do you have any ideas about that, Daniel? You mean to contrast, like a conventional material with OER? Yeah, I think this is a focus we often find in those studies because a lot of studies concentrate, especially on this question, for example, open textbooks. So there's always the question, can you have the same learning effect or the same cost-effectiveness when you use open textbook instead of traditional material? And we can find that a lot. I don't know if that is the right questions. If you always try to compare OER with the classical conventional materials, maybe this should not be... Yeah, the overall leading question. But you can find a lot of studies concerning that question. I think if you want to delve deeper into it, the case of open textbooks might be special of interest. And I think we found a lot of studies where they had, for example, experimental settings. They had two courses. And then they compared by using data analysis. They had an exam and compared the outcomes of the students that used open education resources as contrasted to those who used commercial materials. So that can be found very often, especially in the US region, as we mentioned before. That's interesting. So one more last comment to get us on the road for more research on this. What would you like to do next? Yes. What we would like to do next is to engage more into the debate about open educational practices and open pedagogy. Because I think these are important aspects that are followed by the question about OER. Because we can see that OER is primarily content. But what we need is pedagogical approaches of how to use it and what can we achieve to use it, for example, better learning outcomes, for example, different teaching styles, whatever. So we know a little about these effects. We have strong conceptual debate about this. For example, Chrome and Bosco all day. All of them provide interesting insights, but they don't go so much into the empirical aspects of it. And I think there should be more research about it. Okay, thank you very much, Daniel, Daniel and Nadine. You can stop recording, please. Thank you very much.


The Commission of Police Delta State Police Command Mohammed Ali has said the state command would deploy 11,500 policemen to pose units across the 25 local government areas of the state. The Commission of Police C.P. Ali made the statement at a one-day seminary put together for Nigerian police on election matter with theme security management. Asaba Correspondent Akwomejiro Friday reported that C.P. Ali said the police is set to build up security for Nigerians as they prepare for the forthcoming election and it's going to be free and fair as the security management is called upon. Calling 11,500 policemen from the command and also from the Zonal Office for the purpose of this election. Calling our men galvanize our resources, material and human resources towards ensuring that we have a free, fair and credible election and that is why this election security management is called upon so that we can, you know, breast-toe and further address our men with their expected roles and responsibilities as we prepare for the D-Day.


Hello friends and how are you all doing today? My name is Priyanka and the question says evaluate the following here We need to evaluate sign 60 degree multiplied by cos 30 degree plus sign 30 degree Multiplied by cos 60 degree now before proceeding on with the solution We should be well versed with the table 8.1 in which we know the values of different trigonometric ratios What we need to do in this class is we will be learning all these values and We will be substituting the values one by one for example. We have to Now substitute the value sign 60 degree. So sign 60 degree will be Root three by two cos 30 degree will be root three by two Sign 30 degree is one by two and cos 60 degree is one by two So now we will be substituting all these values over here We have sign 60 degree cos 30 degree plus sign 30 degree cos 60 degree let us substitute the values Root three by two into root three by two plus one by two into one by two So they're equal to three by four plus one by four which is equal to four by four Simplifying we have the answer to the First part as one so this is the required answer to the session Hope you understood the whole process well Do remember these values as you will be substituting them and using it in various questions Take care of your calculations and see you next


Okay, so as the slides are coming up, I'm just going to kick off the discussion, and I'm Laura Rodriguez from NHGRI, and I know some of you, but not all of you. And Steve is going to run our slides, so that is why he is standing up there. But our speakers are going to rotate through the slides. So we're going to start off just with Steve to give a basic frame of the issues as we saw it, looking at patient-facing tools and associated other topics that were put into this very broad set of issues for the hour. And then we'll hear from Janet Williams, who has done a survey of the information that is available out there and looked at the information from different programs. And then we will finally hear from Bill Lawrence, who will talk about what we might learn from some work that they've been doing at PCORI, and hopefully that will round us out nicely to move into our discussion for the hour before lunch. So. Great. Thanks, Laura. So we'll do, as Laura said, we'll do a bit of a tag team on this. I guess the first point to make is that implementation of genomic medicine into practice is going to take effective clinician-patient communication, and you all know that. And if you look at this iconic diagram from the base pairs to bedside paper, as you get over to the right side of this diagram, particularly improving the effectiveness of healthcare, this isn't going to happen if we don't get the clinician-patient communication, clinician-family communication part of this right. Now, as you all know, there are substantial challenges in doing this. I hope you'd all agree that the best patient-facing tools or family-facing tools are expert genetic counselors and medical geneticists and others with content expertise in the area, and there's no substitute for that. But at the same time, we have challenges that are going to make it very difficult to rely on that workforce, as we've been talking about over the course of the morning. So if you think about all of the things that genetic counselors do, this from the National Society of Genetic Counselors' website, genetic counseling is the process of helping people understand and adapt to the medical, psychosocial, and familial implications of genetic contributions to disease, including interpretation of family and medical histories to assess the chance of disease occurrence, education about inheritance, testing, management, prevention, et cetera, and counseling to promote informed choices and adaptation to risks or condition. And in some sense, that's what we ask of our genetics professionals in our broader clinician workforce, but we can't rely on that workforce because of the challenges that face us. There just isn't enough, and so we need tools to make that possible. Some of the specific challenges include the scale of the issue as genomic medicine or genetic medicine moves out from specialty settings into the general medical setting. The workforce demands are just going to be overwhelmed. Secondly, the scope of genomic medicine as we move from targeted to much more broad sequencing or genomic testing, the potential findings that may come back become so broad that it becomes very challenging with our traditional models of education and counseling and decision support to address them. And finally, of course, the issues of science and genetics literacy. We've been talking over the last hour about this from the perspectives of clinicians. We all realize this is a challenge from the perspectives of patients and families and the public as well. So if you think about the functions of patient-facing tools, this is crude, but I want to break it down into pre-test and post-test settings. I think there are three broad ones, one of which is education of patients and families. The second is risk assessment and the third is decision support. And the education may be education that's related for the indication that we are considering doing this particular test, and then some preemptive education related to the possibility of incidental or secondary findings. Risk assessment is going to relate to phenotype and personal as well as family history, and decision support includes things like whether to test, and then possibly, and I put a question mark here because I don't think our community has settled on how we're going to deal with this issue, but possibly the question of preferences for the return of incidental or secondary findings. In the post-test setting, again, we have challenges related to education, risk assessment, and decision support. For education, there is, of course, education related to the primary result that comes back. Education related to any secondary or incidental findings that come back, particularly educational challenges related to variants of uncertain significance, if and when those are reported back. And something we actually haven't talked a lot about over the course of this meeting, but the challenges of negative tests and what those mean, particularly when you're talking about broad sequencing. Risk assessment again becomes a problem, particularly in the setting of secondary or incidental findings. Hopefully you've done a good risk assessment up front for the thing that's relevant to the indication for your test, but you certainly haven't or are unlikely to have done a complete risk assessment for one of the thousands of possible secondary findings that might come back. And so now at the time of that finding coming back is the time to do that risk assessment. And then, again, decision support, both with respect to any diagnostic therapeutic or preventive interventions that might be related to the results. And then, of course, what are we going to do about family members who might be implicated as well? So just to sort of set the stage, and then I'll turn it over to Janet. There is a clear need, I think, for effective, safe, and efficient needs for... There are things that we need in order to be able to effectively, safely and efficiently implement genomic medicine, and that includes a whole suite of patient-facing tools, strategically designed suite of tools that are directed at patients. And many of these tools are really going to be designed to support and extend clinicians who are practicing genomic medicine, including both genetic and genomic specialists, non-genetic specialists in my own world of oncology. The general... There's a subset of oncologists who really are experts in high-risk or inherited cancer syndromes. So most oncologists really are not truly expert in those things, and for them it's a significant challenge, and I think this is true across most areas of medical specialization, and then, of course, primary care clinicians. So with that, let me turn it over to Janet. You're welcome to come on up, Janet, and run the slides from here. And it is this one. So my task in our work group, our panel, was to take a look at some of the tools out there that are designed for patients and that provide them with education or with the means to understand genomics. And although a bit tongue-in-cheek, one of the things that I wanted to do was to just kind of take a look at where would patients go to find information, and in talking with patients that, you know, the place they go is to the internet, and if you're just trying to find out information about what is genomics, what does it mean, I didn't evaluate every one of these, but it is pretty daunting to just get an explanation of what's involved. In looking at the funded projects that are represented here in the room, again, I did some perusing mainly on websites, had a little bit of background information about resources that have been published, and there's much more out there than I could show here, but some of the top items that are referenced in terms of patient education or patient resources include, I think, first and foremost, genetics home reference, which has played a large role, I think, in providing patient-oriented information. I think that many of the oncology folks are well familiar with the cancer genetics PDQ out of NCI, and that's been very helpful also in providing background information for clinicians as well as for patients. The new resource Genome Connect is looking to be a great source of information for the new types of genome findings that are coming out, although they also are, will likely be one of those resources that are connected to many of our projects. Genetic Alliance is mentioned many times. Medline Plus is mentioned, and then, of course, the National Rare Diseases Group is mentioned, and then ARFANAT, which is really more a European site that's available. So these are resources that patients can go to when they're looking primarily for specific information on a specific disease. It's less oriented towards providing resources or tools for patients to understand if they want to do genome sequencing or how that might benefit their family, how they might understand genome sequencing or genome information, and then also how they might communicate information with their families. A couple of these tools, which are actually tools that help to explain results for patients include lab tests online, which is a very generic sort of tool, but it includes genetic results. You heard about the CIRC project on my results formulated by John Connolly, a CHOP, with input from the CIRC members of eMERGE, is another patient resource place to enter genome information and have support that comes back. There's webresourceyourgenome.org that again is patient facing. I wanted to highlight the Mi-46 out of the University of Washington only because it really is a more total tool for patients. It does enable you to upload your results, to have information about what was found in those results. It will help support you in terms of any single gene testing, genome sequencing, or whole genome sequencing. It does offer the process of dynamic consent, something I'll talk about in just a minute, but it also then facilitates researchers to be able to again look at how patients select the results that they wish to receive and how the results can be managed and how patients might use that information that they learned from this tool. I will say that in addition, Genome Connect is also offering that resource to researchers as a means to link patients and researchers. One of the things I wanted to lift up was again the work we've been doing with regard to our whole genome sequencing project, which is looking at tying patient results to clinician results within the electronic health record and providing an interface for these tools to be available both for patients and clinicians at the same time. In terms of our patient qualitative work, I think it's important to recognize the themes that at least the patients within our whole genome sequencing project identified, and that is that patients who have a child with an undiagnosed disease do embark on this ongoing continual search for valid information and resources. They do that now through the Internet and see that as both a blessing and a curse. That prior reports on genetic results are not adequate and are not helpful to patients, and of course they weren't designed to be patient directed, but parents expressed a need for a report that they could understand, and they emphasize that a report that was designed for them would be something that they could use for communication, both with their other providers. Many of these children tend to have multiple providers because they have multiple health conditions and their chronic utilizers of the healthcare system, but they also described how they would use a genome report with explaining the findings and the diagnosis to family, to friends, to their schools in the context of an individualized educational program assessment, and then again with other physicians as well. And they outlined the things that they were looking for in a genome report designed for patients, and that is of course understandable language, a logical flow, some visual appeal, information on what to expect in the future, what's the prognosis that's associated with this genome finding, and then what are the next steps that should be taken, and finally that they would love to see the option for different ways of receiving that report. We are proposing it through the patient portal in MyGuySinger, but our patients do have some connectivity issues in central Pennsylvania and suggested that perhaps they could also receive it on a thumb drive or a phone app or something that enabled them to have that information that wasn't necessarily tied to internet connectivity. I wanted to highlight the CSER project in terms of the work that they're doing on genetic counseling and specifically evaluating genetics counselors' work with patients in the space on returning genome results, but also in the work that they're doing on developing patient-facing educational materials and the publications. I think they'll be an important group to continue to watch. I thought it was also interesting, as I was looking at different options for patient education, that one of the things that the Genetic Alliance in the U.K. has done is to develop a patient charter and that they outlined, again, the support that patients that they found their patients had for genetic counseling, that they recommend actually through this genetic alliance in the U.K. that all patients should be able to access a dedicated genetic counselor before they have their genome sequenced and that there should be more support given to the training of genetic counselors as the need for their services increases. And I couldn't support that more being a genetic counselor, but I'd also like to announce that there are at least 10 new genetic counseling programs currently in development that should be online again within the next year or two. Again, out of this patient charter that was actually established in February of this year, they noted how patients do welcome the sharing of their genomic data for research purposes. I think that's encouraging for all of us in the room, and that they encourage researchers then to engage with the patient community in order to develop accurate and comprehensive information regarding genome sequencing and that we need to make an effort within our research studies and in delivering our clinical care in order to involve in genome sequencing to more closely reflect what patients experience with that information in terms of how we communicate the information. Finally, I wanted to just briefly touch on the issues of counseling and consent. I think that there's been quite a bit of work done in the realm of consent within research. We don't have standards that are accepted for consent for genome sequencing, but I think that the process of taking that from a research setting into consent in the clinical setting is even more onerous. We talk about clinicians not having time to evaluate the results that come back. They also don't have time to spend in the consent process ahead of time. So we need to think critically about how do we accomplish this in the setting of clinical care. Within the Genome Alliance, the UK, as they talked over with their genome researchers, actually this was out of the Hastings Center report, but it was also alerted to in the Genome Alliance, Genomic Alliance UK, that routine approaches to consent for genome sequencing are probably not effective and that it will require innovative approaches to ensure decisions that are informed and meaningful. And this is where the issue of dynamic consent and the idea of revisiting consent as the context for the individual changes. And that context may then influence what an individual patient or a family may want to know. And I believe that's all that I'm going to be talking about. I think I'm next going to turn it over now to Bill and talking about PCORI. Thank you. I'm going to sort of present a view from an outsider and I wanted to start with just a brief roughly two minute explanation of PCORI as I'm not sure how many people here are familiar with them. I'll try and actually keep that literal on the two minutes. But just a little overview first, the purpose of our institute, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, is to assist patients, clinicians, purchasers and policymakers in making informed health decisions basically through the provision of evidence and evidence synthesis. So not only are we talking about providing primary research but talking about providing that research in context through systematic reviews, things like that, so synthesizing across the evidence. And so our big interest is trying to help people make decisions about their care. We put this within a space bar, right? Oh boy. We put this within the context of comparative effectiveness research, essentially comparing what your options are available or what your options are available at any particular decision point and actually comparing the benefits and harms of them. And part of that is actually making sure that we're disseminating research findings to clinicians, to patients, and to other stakeholders. Just a brief thing on who we are on the science side. We have five science programs, the Assessment of Prevention Diagnosis and Treatment Options, which is informally known as our Comparative Effectiveness Research Group. These are the folks who, if you're thinking about actually comparing two different approaches to testing, various interventions that you're probably going to be looking at, our Improving Health Care Systems Group looks at different systems approaches to helping patient care. So thinking about trying to put things within the context of a plan, different types of care management approaches, things like that. The Communication Dissemination Research Group, of which I'm a part, is actually interested in looking at different ways of disseminating information to patients so that we can actually improve decision making. We also have an Addressing Disparities Group looking at how do we improve care for vulnerable populations. And then finally, our Methodologic Research Group, which funds basic methodologic studies in comparative effectiveness research. And it's also our Data Infrastructure Group that sponsors PCORnet, which has both clinical and patient-oriented research organizations, which I believe some of you are members of. Spacebar, spacebar. I will remember spacebar. So part of our mandate here is talking about how do we get information out to patients to actually improve their decision making. And again, that's sort of in my group. And our basic tenet is that producing information is not enough. We've got to get it out to all audiences. And in general, the information itself is of little use unless it reaches those who need it, and it's clear and comprehensible to those who are receiving it. And so with that, I just wanted to give a few thoughts from other areas in which we've done decision making work, and hopefully this might be useful at thinking going forward with your programs. So moving towards the development of decision-making tools, and I put content in here too. Counseling, genetic counseling is a very important approach, but it's also important to understand what that content is in the counseling. So I want to make the comments both on sort of tools, both patient-facing tools and on counseling. So the content basically, number one, the way we look at it, is it's based upon the evidence linking choices to patient relevant outcomes. So in thinking about it, what we are looking for is information. If you're doing the test or thinking about doing the test, does actually doing that improve someone's health, longevity, some other sort of patient-relevant outcome? We're looking for methodologically rigorous studies, probably the most relevant group in thinking about this for helping patients to make decisions is the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Group, and that may be one resource to look to. Involve patients and clinicians throughout the process of developing and evaluating the tools. And one of the things that I will try to harp upon is stakeholder engagement writ large. People should be involved in the research at the start of the research. Don't bring them in at the end to say, how do you help disseminate this? It should be accessible to patients, which I have, there are two forms of accessible. Number one, it should be available. If they can't find it, it's useless. And it's got to be understandable. And here there are big issues in terms of health literacy and health numeracy. I was at a decision science meeting last week where an investigator presented data that she surveyed a group of patients out of clinic and started with the question that John was supposed to take his pills on empty stomach but ate lunch. And the directions say, well, you can take it two hours after the meal. When should he take his pills? 40% of people couldn't answer that question. So things to be thinking about as you move forward, making sure that it's accessible to a wide range of patients. It should be responsive to patients' needs and preferences. So basically, helping to inform choices based upon preferences as opposed to dictating what you want them to do. And then finally, evaluate it. Does it actually work? So just a couple of thoughts moving past development. And PCORI doesn't really fund development of decision-making tools and such. But we are interested once you have some basic efficacy data on actually comparing them in real world situations. And that may be one way we can talk about interface between NHR, GI, and PCORI. But with translation into the real world settings, I'm a primary care doc. How are you going to get me to use this? And are my patients going to understand it? Will it get used? Do you have buy-in from the relevant stakeholders? Again, if I don't know to use it as a primary care doc, then chances are my patients aren't going to use it. For the decision tools, who maintains them? We've talked a little bit within the group about doing repositories of the tools and such. This is a rapidly evolving field. And there's a lot of impetus to developing the tools. But when things change, there's not a whole lot of impetus to update the tools. So who maintains them? And then finally, do the tools actually improve decision-making? And does it improve patient outcomes, which is really what we're looking for? And are there general points here? All right. Do you want to?


Hey are you going to review the new Justice League Sniper Cut? What? No. Probably not. Oh come on, why not? Because I don't have an interest in the film. Everyone else is reviewing the film. Just another reason for me not to do it will get lost in a sea of everyone else reviewing the damned film. Come on, they're saying it's so good! And I don't care. I still don't want to watch the film. But why not? Just give me a reason. I don't have time to watch the movie and do a review of it. I have a job and other projects that I'm working on for stuff that I'm actually interested in. Alright, so you're never going to watch it then? I'll probably watch it eventually and I might even review it at that point. But I don't want to get caught up in the hype of this new version of the film. All this feels like it's a glorified director's cut. Okay, I guess that makes sense. So what are you working on now? Just a few videos that I've had in the work for a while. Do you mind if I get back to that? Oh yeah, sure. My bad. Thank you. And now a word from Glassfoot. For the, like, five of you that probably care, no I'm not actually going to be doing a review of the Snyder Cut. At least not now. I might do it later down the line.  I care more about the MCU overall at this point than I do about the DC films. I don't think some of the DC films are really that bad, but hey, I don't really have an interest in watching them. At least none of the ones that are coming out, especially since they feel like retreads. I don't know. I'll eventually get around to watching the Justice League. I just don't care right now and don't feel like watching it. But yes, for the one percent of you that probably care, no I'm not going to be doing it. I hope that you guys have a fun day. I hope that you all have a great day, but yeah, peace out guys.