Hi and welcome to the session. Let us discuss the following question. Question says, a rectangular sheet of tin 45 cm by 24 cm is to be made into a box without top by cutting off square from each corner and folding up the flaps. What should be the side of the square to be cut off so that volume of the box is maximum? First of all let us understand that if we are given a function f. Defined on interval i, c belongs to interval i such that f double dash c exists. Then x is equal to c is a point of local maxima if f dash c is equal to 0 and f double dash c is less than 0. Value fc is local maximum value of function f. This is the key idea to solve the given question. Let us now start with the solution. We are given a rectangle whose length is 45 cm and breadth is 24 cm. Now let us assume that each side of the square which is cut off from the corner be x cm. So we can write let each side of the square cut off from the corner is equal to x cm. Now clearly we can see length of the box is equal to 45 minus 2 x cm, breadth of the box is equal to 24 minus 2 x cm and height of the box is equal to x cm. So we can write length of the box is equal to 45 minus 2 x cm, breadth of the box is equal to 24 minus 2 x cm, height of the box is equal to x cm. Now volume of the box is given by length into breadth into height. Now volume of box v is equal to 45 minus 2 x multiplied by 24 minus 2 x multiplied by x. Now differentiating both sides with respect to x we get dv upon dx is equal to 45 minus 2 x multiplied by 24 minus 2 x multiplied by 1 plus 45 minus 2 x multiplied by x multiplied by minus 2 plus 24 minus 2 x multiplied by x multiplied by minus 2. Here we have applied the product rule to find derivative of this term. Now simplifying we get dv upon dx is equal to 1 0 8 0 minus 90 x minus 48 x plus 4 x square minus 90 x plus 4 x square minus 48 x plus 4 x square. Now this is further equal to 12 x square minus 276 x plus 1 0 8 0. Now clearly we can see minus 90 x minus 48 x minus 90 x minus 48 x is equal to minus 276 x and 4 x square plus 4 x square plus 4 x square is equal to 12 x square. So we get dv upon dx is equal to 12 x square minus 276 x plus 1080. Now we will find all the values of x at which dv upon dx is equal to 0. So we will put dv upon dx is equal to 0. This implies 12 x square minus 276 x plus 1 0 8 0 is equal to 0. Now dividing both sides by 12 we get x square minus 23 x plus 90 is equal to 0. Now this implies x minus 5 multiplied by x minus 18 is equal to 0. Facturizing this quadratic equation we get these two factors x minus 5 and x minus 18. Now this implies x minus 5 is equal to 0 or x minus 18 is equal to 0. Now if we add 5 on both the sides we get x is equal to 5 and here if we add 18 on both the sides we get x is equal to 18. So we get x is equal to 5 or x is equal to 18. Now we know breadth of the box is equal to 24 minus 2x. At x is equal to 18 it will become negative. So we will reject value of x is equal to 18. So neglecting x is equal to 18 we get x is equal to 5. Hence only value of x is 5. Now to show that volume is maximum at x is equal to 5 we will find second derivative of v. We know dv upon dx is equal to 12x square minus 276x plus 1080 this we have already shown above. Now differentiating both the sides with respect to x again we get d square v upon dx square is equal to 24x minus 276. Now we will find the value of d square v upon dx square at critical point that is at x is equal to 5 this is equal to 24 multiplied by 5 minus 276. Now this is further equal to 120 minus 276 which is equal to minus 156. So we get d square v upon dx square at x is equal to 5 is less than 0. Now we know at x is equal to 5 dv upon dx is equal to 0 and d square v upon dx square is less than 0. So this implies x is equal to 5 is a point of local maxima or we can say volume of the box is maximum at x is equal to 5. Now we know side of the square to be cut off is x centimeter and volume is maximum at x is equal to 5. So side of the square to be cut off is equal to 5 centimeter. So our required answer is x is equal to 5 centimeter. This completes the session hope you understood the session take care and have a nice day.


John Claude's answer to Sally's question, they're actually set us up beautifully for the next panel session, which is where I wanted to stop at that point. Could I ask our panellists to come up onto the platform now? There should be five of you. Right, thank you. We're going to our next session now, which is our panellists. Dame Janet Finch commented that the one thing that she got out of chairing the Finch committee was that she's become a noun. She's yet to become a verb. We look forward to that. We do have the panel now to build on that, and I thought John Claude's answer to Sally's question at the end there really did introduce very nicely the theme on this. In the spirit of John Claude's suggestion that we should upend the author, I'm not going to do the usual thing of introducing them. I'm going to ask them to introduce themselves. I'm going to ask them just to first of all say very quickly who they are and then give us one or two words as to why they think they're here. That should be very brief because then what we'll do is go to five minutes for everybody to speak to their topic because I want to allow a maximum amount of time before lunch for interaction from the floor. So if we could start from the far end and if you could just quickly say who you are and why you think you were asked to be here. So my name is Calbu. I'm working in Brussels at the European Commission with the vice-president Neely Cruz of the Commission who is responsible for the digital agenda and for ICT related research funding in Europe. As we have heard this morning already a lot, a big part of the reason we are here is the digital revolution and the technologies that we are seeing. We are in the business of producing more of that and that's why we are also in the business of trying to benefit from it and open access obviously is one of the big potential areas for benefiting from it. I guess I'm here because I've been very much involved with the development of the policy statement issued by the Commission last year regarding open access to scientific information. The Commission has set out its own approach to open access when it comes to its own role as a research funder. The Commission is a very large research funder in Europe with a new programme, over 70 billion from 2014 to 2020, which will be covered by an open access requirement. And also a recommendation to Member States as to our conviction that they should think about these questions too and essentially do not necessarily in the same way, in similar ways as was done in the UK with a Finch group to have a thought about what this all implies and what should be done about this. So develop open access policies requirements and so on. So I was very close to that, I continue to be close to that and I guess that's why I'm here. Thank you, thank you very much. My name is Sally Hardy. I'm the Chief Executive of the Regional Studies Association, not a commercial publisher I would add now. I've spoken quite a bit at conferences recently about open access in relation to journal publishing and how that will impact on learned societies and what the potential consequences are for learned societies in terms of the way in which we add to research ecology. And I think I've been invited here to broaden that reflection and to take into account open access monographs, what difference might that make, where can the learned societies make a difference both in our work with our commercial publishing partners but also with our members and the wider community. And I hope in my five minute statement that I'll be able to make some reflections on where I think the learned societies might begin to make those contributions and why I think we've been quite slow to engage in that process. It was quite telling for me, I think there's only five people on the list of participants that own up to being from a learned society. Of course others of you may be masquerading under your institutional affiliations. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Kim Hackett, I'm from the Higher Education Funding Council for England. And I'm here today I think, well firstly in the place of David Sweeney who wasn't able to attend. But mainly because HFK at the moment are currently developing our policy intentions regarding open access and the next research excellent framework. Not the current ref that's happening at the moment but the one thereafter. So we've been consulting and working dialogue with the sector on how we can introduce that requirement and really to say a bit about how monographs fit into that today. Thank you. So I'm Robert Gatti, I'm an economist up at Trinity College. But the reason I'm here I think is because with a group of other academics up there we started up an open access publishing company, open book publishers. Pretty much because we agree with absolutely everything that the previous speaker said and we were frustrated by moaning to ourselves about it and frustrated with the existing publishing environment that was just denying the developments that were possible in humanities and social sciences. So we thought damn it let's do it. So that's what we've done. And I guess that's why. Thank you. I'm Philippe Grun. I've been asked to provide an awful first perspective on open access monographs in the social science and humanities. Well, in the line of the previous talk by Jean Claude I usually say more that I'm a writer than an author.  But I try to move away from it. So I'm going to do whatever I've been asked to do. And basically the main topic would be to try to convince you that if we want to build something that makes sense in terms of writing and publishing open access monograph. We will face challenges that have nothing to do with the usual thing we consider as challenges like less public money or piracy or whatever. Right. Thank you. Great introductions. Now what I'm going to do is ask each of you to speak for just five minutes. Now we have to do this in the right order because otherwise you'll end up with the wrong slides. And I think that will mess up content a little bit too much for all of you. Although it could be a challenge of course to speak to the wrong slides in the spirit of what Jean Claude said earlier. But let's not let's not do that. So Rupert that means you've got to start. Well that's easy because I know you can come up here. I go up there. All right. Okay. Okay. Thank you. You might have to prompt me five minutes. I tend to burble sometimes. So yeah I didn't come in with any slides but I think the issue and it's very rare that I've had to come up and speak after somebody who's so eloquently said pretty much all that I wanted to say. You know we are in a stage where dissemination of knowledge is possible on a scale which was unimaginable even 30 years ago. And we're stuck in a system which was determined 30 years ago. And so we're right at a point where we can transform the way that we disseminate our knowledge that we generate that our knowledge that the humanities and social sciences can interact and engage with society. And right now as the abstract for the whole conference said we're in a situation where monographs have gone from dissemination of 2000. Sounds quite a lot when you look at it now at about 200. But 2000 is still tiny and it's good when you've got a melt metal. But when you don't have to melt any metal, when you don't have to pack things on horses over mountains, when you can do it digitally it's pathetic. And now we're in a situation where we can engage with the full globe, where we can disseminate any ideas that we do have, good, bad, whatever. We can put them out there and get people to engage with them. At a broader level the humanities and social sciences are having to fight for this funding stream to prove our relevance. And how can we prove our relevance when our primary and most important output is being printed 200 times and being given access to maybe 500 people. And then we claim we're meaningful. We can't do that. And so we've got to sort of front up and say there is another way of doing it. We also are no longer restricted to paper. There are different ways of engaging and more important ways of engaging. And paper will remain, I'm sure, one important outlet, but there's lots of other ways as well. And so we can't get fixated in that. The final thing, if I've still got a couple of minutes, is that as was stated previously, the dissemination process is a very small end point of the whole research process. But it's critical. I say to all my students it's no good you knowing that. Unless you can tell people that's what knowledge is for. And right now the bit where we tell people is bound up in a book and it's constrained access by publishers through a payment system. And so we are paying for the dissemination process by putting money done to be a reader. And so we are paying by denying access to knowledge. And so I think we need to think all the time that whatever we're proposing, if we've got this payment to read model down, then we are saying, guess what, Africa, we're not interested. Guess what, everybody who's not got an academic position, you'll never understand. And that's not where we can and should be. So it's a real, real social damage that's being done, I think, by restricting ourselves to the book and by having a payment mechanism for the reader to access what the ideas that we're putting out. Thank you. Hello. So having us to be here basically because I do write open access monographs in the social science and the humanities. But I must first put a disclaimer. The three of them have been written after I left academia. And when I actually, when I was an academic researcher, I didn't feel any real search to write monographs. And that maybe tells something that is there are lots of things that do qualify content wise. Two of them were peer reviewed classically that come from outside of the academia. So I would like to start by, sorry, by a few hard facts, what I call hard facts are facts that won't disappear even when you hate them. So I think basically the social science and humanities and are, they are just the same than any other domain in which people think about stuff, write stuff and try to make it available to readers. And what we experience is that with the birth of the information technology and the internet and the capability building it has made possible, there we are more interesting people who are in a position to write stuff and make it available to others, much more than before. And even the, let's say the filters that define monographs in the social science and humanities, they are not enough to prevent this fact from existing also there. Reading time or attention time more generally is not increasing. And even if access is made easier, it is severely constrained. And the result is a simple consequence is that the average audience is strongly diminishing. You know, in the US there are five times more published titles of books per year than there were 20 years ago, and this will keep going. However, in that situation, some small audience or middle audience books matter, of course it would be stupid to say that all of them matter. And we have a challenge in trying to make them unknowledge, to assist more of them to exist. So what I'm trying to do is to try to learn a bit from the experience of my last book written with a contribution of my daughter, Suzanne, who was published by Amsterdam University Press and distributed for the open access version by the OAPN platform.  But commercially books, and I will come back to that because they are the stupidest thing that I have seen here in this domain, a free to share PDF and an augmented edition site. Here are the figures for, I mean, my books sort of live long, which means they live slow also. So this is an ongoing process, but basically you could see that about 500 copies have been sold, which, let's say by standards of this domain, look like a middle, rather than small, but 3,000 downloads have occurred on the OAPN site, which is amazingly low. So the first lesson is if I do it myself like I did for the second book, the one you saw before, and I am myself promoting the downloads, I will have five times more downloads. So the first lesson is open access publishers or publishers in general, they don't know how to promote free access on the internet. It's not easier to have many people access for free a book that it is to have many people access it by paying. But the other interesting thing is the augmented edition site of a book had 10,000 unique visitors, which looks like a more interesting figure. Another interesting thing is several of my books have been translated in several languages for one, and this is something which is incredibly encouraged by open access. None of these translations would have existed without open access. Now a few words before I leave the floor on the augmented edition. This is in it, we have what you should find actually. I also run a company that does annotation tools and websites, collaborative websites. So we wanted that to be a kind of window of a know how. So basically you find all the software code that was used in the study, all the data sets. You can comment chapter by chapter. You see an example here. You can run interactive media of the interactive models on the site. And basically what do you see is well over 10,000 unique visitors. About only 5% will invest in the real interactive facilities that is the data sets source code. Which goes back to the number of people who were seriously interested in reading the book. The most innovative aspect is maybe the running of interactive models because it's really developing a new involved relationship of readers in the substance of what is told in the book. We were very much stimulated by an example of a book on fiscal reform and fiscal policy by Thomas Piketty, Cami, Saez and Landais. Give a look if you have time and thanks for your attention. Thank you. As I already mentioned, the commission has a double role as a research funder and as a research policy maker. Speaking as a research funder first, I can report that in Horizon 2020, which is the next framework programme for research of the European Union, there will be, depending on how you count, between 700 million and 1.5, 1.6 billion for the humanities and social science research funding for seven years. So it's roughly 200 million a year. That's a substantial part of money and obviously, as I mentioned already, we're looking for open access to the results of that funding. Now the commission is rather agnostic when it comes to what the results are and so it's not really in contradiction necessarily with what John Claude explained this morning. So I think it would be very open if people came with new ways of doing that but obviously this is a programme that is based on paying out the money to those who do the research and if those who do the research decide that they need to write books or papers or journal articles, they are going to do that. And we are there to first of all tell them that you would like to see the results in open access. We are also there to tell them how to do open access and for those who haven't followed this policy debate mainly last year, a little bit in the interaction between the Finch discussion to use it as a noun again and our policy announcement in July, which came slightly afterwards. Our position in that is, let's say, a balanced one. The commission always wants to be balanced for those of you who have ever visited a policy event. You have heard this term before. We are basically in the middle, we have said that we are very much in favour of green. We like self-repository of authors. However, we are not against gold. So if people want to do that, they can do it and they can even get the money reimbursed inside the project funding that they have. Now, I was interested in the beginning about John Clos' discussion about the collaboration aspect and this argument that we need to get away perhaps more than we have in the past from the single author. Obviously, the European research programmes, they are about collaboration. They are actually about forced collaboration because you need partners from several countries in these projects. So often there is already the first question that they have and how do they bring together the results. This brings me to another problem in the end. So you have project reports, you have outcomes of this and of course you have individual researchers or groups of researchers publishing about the results. You may also have the odd or not so odd PhD student working away on their thesis as part of such a funded project which then comes much later. Obviously, we want to have all of the outcomes covered by the open access mandate that is going to be there which raises the question of what to do when projects are over. What about this funding element? Because we really want to be balanced on this. We don't want to just say, well, we agree in gold but by the way now your project is over so there is no money anymore. So to give you a state of play currently, we are studying the way possibilities of how to do that without however going as far as I think some announcements in the UK have thought us, the UK would go. Namely of somehow saying that every comma will have money for what's going to be done there. It's obvious that this amount of money is not available and especially not known today. It's not known, cannot be budgeted for and therefore by definition it's not available but we are working very actively on setting up such an instrument that would allow to catch those cases where really the outcome comes after the project is formally over but we really want the results not to end up in some close publishing setting but we want them to be available too and to allow that we want to be having set up a flexible system. Two other elements perhaps interesting also in light of what Martin said earlier about the stuff and the data and the different kinds of things that we have. We're also looking not only at publications and be they modern or more old fashioned types of publications but also at data, so research data, the underlying information on which the results are based and there we are setting up something we should call the data pilot and basically the idea is here to make sure that we go into the direction of open access to the data too. However in a less let's say forcing way with publications we have already run a pilot as some of you may know since 2008 we think we have enough experience to now conclude that it's time to go to an open access mandate whereas for data it's a bit more early days still. Right now I think tomorrow in Brussels there will be a hearing about this just to explore with the communities of exploring the various interests and concerns about how such a data pilot could run. Obviously our hunch and Vice President Cruz's approach to this is of course the more the better and what you may also know that we are in the business of building the infrastructures that will allow the data to be there to be stored and actually to be accessed. This is more about more than about just buying cheap storage. This is about building the systems that allow you to actually work with this data to curate it to keep it alive and useful. Final word then on the monograph in human humanities and social sciences as you may have already gathered from what I've said up to now we have no made no special amends for monograph non monograph in principle the same rules will apply. Obviously the question will then come up how are the costs you know allocated between the two types of very different types of publications. How can these things be planned before normally takes we have heard it a few times already takes longer to write the book. So maybe you're in a larger risk to be behind a project schedule and to be too late in a way.  We would be happy. Our money would flow. Our auditors would be happy. But in the end you could still finalize the manuscript a year two or three years after projects are over. That may be one possibility. As I said we are studying others but necessarily we don't really see a difference between this area and others and there I want to echo what Rupert said earlier in a way. This is research publicly funded. The results should be accessible and obviously when you then go down to the details there may be differences in the way the communities approach this. But from the research funders perspective we don't see the need to make any special arrangements for that apart from the embargo period for self depositing where we have allowed for 12 months. Instead of six for these areas which I think also has seen some examples elsewhere. And with that I spoke 90 seconds too long. I hope you can forgive me. Thank you. So thank you very much. I've been asked to talk about how learned societies will support monograph authors as they transition to open access. And when I was preparing I found it quite difficult to engage with partly because it's difficult to speak on behalf of the learning societies. Because we're really not very homogenous. But I'll give it to you from my perspective. The second reason is that not many of my chief executive officer colleagues have engaged with this fully yet. We've been very slow to do this. So with those two caveats I'm going to share my thoughts. Let me put books in perspective for you from a regional studies association point of view. Our annual income is around a million pounds. Of that books in terms of editorial expenses and royalties come in at 4,000 pounds. That's 0.5% of our income comes from books. By contrast our journals programme contributes 501% and I think the RSA case is not untypical. Now is that good enough? No of course it isn't. Our book series is important to us. We publish with Routledge. It's growing. We have more manuscripts coming in. There's clearly an appetite to both to both write them. And in our series sales are stable growing in some areas on some of our paperback books. So what do we need to do as a society? I suppose I see three types of activity for us. Firstly an advisory role where we inform our members about the changes and the implications that there might be for them. The role of an advocate for our members. And finally I think there's a collective role for the learned societies where we might pose questions on issues that would have a more general resonance in the wider community. So I see a kind of three stage thing. So first I'm going to quickly talk about playing the role of an advocate for our members. And in doing this it will be important for learned societies to recognise that open access is not even across global territories. It's rolling out in slightly different ways around the world. And our responses need to be nuanced. So if we look at three kind of themes. Funding, pricing and publishing formats they seem core. So how will funding mechanisms work? How will funding be divided between journal APCs and book APCs? How will we be sure that our members get access to those funds in whatever kind of society we work? What about pricing? We're beginning to see offers come through now to the market. So Palgrave are offering £11,000. Springer, €15,000. Manchester University Press have come in at £5,900 for up to 80,000 words and then a sliding scale. Intech are charging by the chapter. There's a multitude of different models. So from a learned society point of view are those prices equitable? Do they apply across all disciplines? If not, what's the justification for that? Is it because of increased typesetting costs because of the type of content? I wonder whether we might be seeing the days of more expensive books in the areas like economics and business studies coming to an end and I think that would be a very good thing. What about publishing formats? A number of models are appearing. There are models where you make the plain HTML version that can't be printed freely available. So that's your open access and then you buy.  It's possible to buy premium e-books with enhanced navigation, search facilities and multimedia content. But which model is best? Does there need to be a single best model? Perhaps there's advantage in having a complex offer which allows authors to choose from a wide number of options that might suit their audiences better. Another area where we might support our members is through advising them on what's happening, developments with open access monograph publishing. In preparing, I was very struck, for example, on a different culture and attitude to licensing in the books world, the journals world. In books, CC Buy seems to be promoted as a unilaterally good thing. If you look at the Palgrave and the Springer websites, CC Buy is beautifully displayed as excellent. John Claude, I'm sure, would totally agree with that. But we know from various surveys and the OAPN survey most recently that many authors have reservations about that. They're worried about the way in which their content might be used. And they do feel a sense of ownership and wanting to protect that. I think the associations have a role and a responsibility to their members in getting these issues out and making sure that they know what these licences are, what they mean, what the implications are. For example, on the Palgrave site, they quite openly say that if you're going to publish your book CC Buy, please don't plan to include third party materials because it's A, likely to cost you a lot more money, or B, you're not going to get permission for it. What kind of world is that that we're living in? We really need to make sure that our constituent members understand these issues. Finally, I imagine that as with open access journals, there will be a kind of engagement by the learned societies in the debate. And what I would like to see is quite a number of issues being raised by the societies, which will have this broader resonance where we can engage in discussions with academics, with the commercial publishers and with the funders, and quite a number of issues immediately spring to mind. So green or gold open access publishing from monographs. There's a real push to gold, but does it have to be that way? And if it's green, what's an appropriate embargo? And does that vary by subject area? Not all publishers are offering discounts to developing countries. Springer is because it's funded externally, but Palgray isn't, and they're completely open about that on their website. How do we feel about that as a community? How do we ensure a publishing environment which avoids a breakout of predatory publishers? And I refer you to Beall's list here of predatory publishers. We know that there are publishers that would sacrifice quality just for the money. What about peer review? Absolutely critical question for the learned societies, I suggest. Do we need a debate about new forms of peer review? Or are we confident in our existing systems? If we use sales as a proxy for quality at the moment, will publishers be able to upgrade their portals in order to allow the measurement of downloads and page views? We know it's being done in some of the pilot projects at the moment. But if so, for the smaller publishers, how will they fund that? What about marketing? This was raised earlier. Access is one thing, but readership is something else. Now, I think the OAPN results show that if you do make monographs open access, there are more downloads and views. But how do we know that? What will be the incentive for marketing in a world where the publishers have all the money up front? And is it right that we push all of that back onto the academics? That's not their primary purpose. How will membership schemes work and will they be ethical? What about VAT? That will have a big impact. Not very interesting. I can't stand VAT myself. I find it very confusing. But it is an important issue in open access publishing and online publishing. Finally, can the publishers make this model work and will it be sustainable? And what will happen to incomes, to organisations like the Learned Societies? Journal's income is absolutely critical for my society, but anything that damages the societies will have an impact down the line on research ecology. So, I think I've raised more questions than I've answered. The move to open access publishing has gone with dazzling speed and not a little controversy in journals. In open access monographs, it's been almost silent from my perspective, but the societies really do need to engage, not only in terms of our advocacy and advice roles, but also practically, could I make our older publications open access? How would I go about doing that? How would that be funded? It seems to me this conference is very timely in raising a number of very, very important issues for the societies. Thank you. Hello. I'm going to start off just by giving an overview of the benefits of open access generally, which underpin our policy objective. And they are, as is well known, increased efficiency in the research process in having research findings freely available and accessible online, with all the potential for text and data mining tools developing, and for public understanding in being able to freely access publicly funded research findings. So, as a council, we want those benefits to apply to research in all disciplines, and for open access, therefore, extend all output types for which it's reasonably achievable to do so. Furthermore, sharing some of the ideas already discussed today, we share the view that open access for monographs actually offers an opportunity to develop a sustainable model and also for it to respond to the changing environment of scholarly communications. So, following on from that, it's our policy objective to encourage an increased proportion of research outputs to be published in open access form. So, to achieve that, we've announced an intention to introduce an open access requirement into the next research excellence framework after the 2014 exercise, and that's the UK-wide research assessment on which we base our allocation of funding. So, we set out our initial thoughts on how we'd introduced this requirement in a letter in February and sorted advice on that, on those initial thoughts, and it's that advice I wanted to discuss with you today, really, and in particular, the advice that we received on monographs. We think this advice offers quite a significant resource to us at the moment in terms of increasing our understanding on the feasibility of open access and to get a sense of the different perspectives that exist in the sector at the moment and the varying concerns that are held by different groups. What the advice did show and demonstrate was a widespread support for the principles of open access, which I don't think many people disagree with. With regard to monographs, the advice underlined the value of monographs for research in the humanities and social sciences, and that's something that's been a little bit questioned today, something that came through strongly in the advice that we received. But advice also echoing what we've heard about concerns about the current model for publishing monographs is ascribed as being broken and offering low economic return. Therefore, a number of respondents expressed a view that there's a need for a sustainable open access model, often with a view that Hefke should encourage and support developing work on this. But similarly, there were concerns that the developing models would need to ensure that the UK reputation for a search in these disciplines is maintained through the high standards, through keeping the high standards of peer review and editing that currently underpin the quality of research in these output types. But that reflects a more widely held concern in the advice relating to the timing of our policy intentions and the stage of development of open access monograph models. A number of respondents did highlight the number of new initiatives often enthusiastically with a great deal of optimism about their potential which is great. But many also highlighted the quite early stage of some of these developments suggesting that they're not going to be advanced enough to make open access for the post 2014 Ref feasible even with an appropriate notice period before the requirement applied and especially in view of the different publication times between monographs as compared with journals. So in summary the majority view expressed was that it was at this stage not appropriate to introduce a requirement for open access for monographs into the next Ref. The advice also highlighted the different range of positions from researchers, publishers, funders and their specific concerns and issues which we'll need to address going forward and gather evidence where possible to inform further policy development. So just to summarise the next steps of what we're doing we sought that advice to feed into the development of a formal consultation on open access in the next Ref and that consultation is due to be launched in a few weeks time. In developing those proposals we have taken account of the advice that we received including on those outputs for which it's appropriate to expect open access publication. So for monographs in the meantime as mentioned it's clear that there are a number of views and concerns to address supported by a number of calls for further work to be done and we don't have the answers at this stage to address those concerns that have been raised in the responses more widely. But we think it's important now that we all work together to gather the evidence on monograph publishing, explore the future of workable sustainable models that will maintain the high standards and increase accessibility. So we're just at the very beginning sages of some work that we're hoping to take forward in partnership with other funders to gather evidence and explore the possibilities working with key representatives from the different interested groups. So we're looking forward to exploring these issues and we'll of course report on these in due course. Thank you all our panellists. It's now open for comments and points from the floor and what I'd like you to do if you could just introduce yourself and keep the comments or questions relatively brief because we haven't got that much time and then I'll ask members of the panel to respond. So who'd like to start off? Yes, yes. Can I see somebody? We're back. Sorry, sorry. Got a light in my eye here. Please go ahead. And also because it clearly raises so many practical problems but one of the ideas that I've heard floating around about green is that learned societies might be a better place for the repositories to be than the repositories that currently exist in HEIs. Partly because then it would be much easier and more obvious to go to the subject concerned. Now then of course there would be a funding problem and I think the funding problem is one that we might encourage Hefsey and other people to be thinking about. Thank you. Let's start with you Sally on that then because it starts in with learned societies in green. It's a very interesting question and I would very much like to explore green book publishing as well. The commercial publishers seem to have moved firmly down the gold route and that's for very understandable reasons. There isn't very much to be read on green but there is some material if you look closely for it. Embargos would be a serious issue there. How long do you embargo a book for? I think that would be quite tricky. Your point on repositories is very interesting and a little bit scary because running a repository is an absolutely non-trivial task. I really don't think that it would be realistic for many humanities and social science learned societies to engage in that even with additional funding. I really think that I struggle to see how my organisation would manage to run a repository in a way that would make it helpful to the global research community if I'm honest. Thanks Sally. Other comments on green. I had some experience with let's say my first book which was published by Fayyar. It's a subsidiary of the Lagarde Arachet books. There was a six month embargo and it was sought a kind of green model because I was allowed to distribute it on a designated site. Though it was under a creative common license which meant it went everywhere after and the main lesson I learned is from the angle of synergy between access to the open access version and sales the proper embargo duration is zero which means that let's say the distinction between green and gold in the domain of books I think is probably a mistaken one in the sense that if you have an embargo of zero it means the only question is who takes responsibility for distributing the open access version. But I'm pretty sure that's not how most publishers will see it because they have internalized the idea that people don't buy stuff that they can get for free even if it's not the same thing and as a result they will ask for longer and longer embargoes and so my suggestion would be maybe to to forget about this distinction I mean it has spared monographs up to now so maybe we should keep it like that thank you thank you in the same line I think the discussion that's going on right now is still very much stuck on the idea that there is a fixed monograph even if we take the monograph as the end product of a certain process maybe there would be a role for learned societies as well in helping promote the manuscripts ahead of things promoting the communities around these manuscripts and working in terms of repositories working with libraries I think there's a natural fit there and then when the the manuscript reaches some sort of viable plateau intellectually speaking then something like a publication could take place which would not necessarily stop the evolution of that text but would show that this is a long-term service document that can be perhaps commercialised sold whatever but then we go into a different realm and we have a neat distinction between the intellectual effort and the economic sphere would you like to comment on that? I agree wholeheartedly I think one of the problems that we've got is the debate is exactly this rigidity and I think the green gold the issue of an embargo period is really critical here if you're going to realise the potential of open access I mean it's not even the potential of open access open access is a piece in a puzzle of digital dissemination it's a really critical piece but it's only a piece and you can't disseminate knowledge you can't do, you can't realise the potential of digital dissemination without having the text available for people to interact with and so an embargo period of anything is a nonsense because you're denying the very process of dissemination which is so critical to where we should be going so this green gold distinction I think is damaging because it forces one back into a fixed package and that this thing comes out as a fate to complete something that's there with a full stop and a bound cover on it and that's what we call gold and we put it somewhere else and call green I think there is a real role for institutional repositories in exactly the same way that there's a process there that is capable of storing the disseminated work of an institution or a university for academic societies in being people to help facilitate identification and encouragement of good research and putting it up there I really really really pull my hair out at academic societies that say I rely on the money that the role of the societies I'm not sure when the role of the societies stepped in to be a union representative for its participants it used to be about disseminating knowledge to get out there and letting society access it and I think we can really focus that and bring it down and bring the societies back to play a central role in that Thank you, now Sally wants to respond to that but I'm not but I'm not going to let her because Carl you gave us initially I'm not going to let her I won't be able to stop her eventually but Carl you gave us some very very large numbers at the beginning that you're going to give us all so how are you going to match your and Kim how are you going to match your funding models to something that everybody seems to think is a good thing how can you make your funding models make it possible for the sort of vision that Rupert's talking about there First a clarification the reason we are talking about green is not about embargoes in the context of green is not that we want this text to stay close for 6 months or 12 obviously not you have to see in the context of research funder going out and telling the recipients of the money what they can do and you can imagine that right now everybody knows the figures they're not very large of spontaneous making open access of research publications by the authors that's the only reason we're talking about mandates now and going from zero basically to 100 and saying everything needs to be open on day one is not just people will say well it's great because that's the only way that makes sense I was a little bit what Rupert said we had a lot of debate in Brussels not to call it lobbying around this and I think it makes sense if you talk about a transition system because there will be researchers somebody called them conservative earlier especially the young ones and you cannot just ignore all of that they are there, they are in the process of already writing something and then tell them well it needs to be open from day one so forget about all of those journals who now and not only without impact maybe from the UK debate have now chosen to demand embargo periods that are longer than 12 months or longer than 6 months you just tell them sorry forget about this publication opportunities that's what we don't want so we want to leave it open to be reasonable to make it possible for people to get both to be available in open access and publish in the journal of the dream if they can call it like that and the best possible one that they can get into leaving alone the whole debate about should be such a thing as a good and a bad journal and whether that is the past or the future but you see in a way a research fund has also a conservative place because it's about putting money out for something that politicians have decided is important and so you cannot then stop putting out all of that and say well I don't believe in the journal anymore because then you just become irrelevant and so maybe this situates a bit this is a sketch one last comment if I may on this there are some people that explain very convincing terms to authors and nobody can stop them from making their results available on day one for free for everyone so I like this idea I like people doing that but there are only so many instruments you have to actually take this tool and actually do it and so that's the reason why we mention embargo without meaning that they have to keep it closed far from it Thank you another four coming back to Sally Kim would you say that one of the reasons why in your consultation were you were unenthusiastic about moving to open access for monographs because they were thinking in their minds where am I going to find £10,000 Not so clearly I think that's part of the reason and certainly from the humanities and social sciences that is a concern for open access more generally not just for monographs but mainly because there wasn't confidence that there had been a workable model demonstrated yet through which they'd be able to meet the requirement Well thank you that's really gratifying that people in the academic community think that there's no problem with finding £10,000 and are only in fact limited by their concerns about the business model so Sally all of your members have no problem with finding £10,000 but are concerned about the business model is that fair? I'm going to come back to Rupert's comments directly I knew you would Thank you Perhaps I slightly misrepresented our position or perhaps you've chosen to poke a little mischief at us I do feel obliged to defend the role of societies We very much are about building communities in the way that Jean-Claude suggested so where are many academic papers first showcased they're showcased either within research networks or at conferences and events that are organised by the academic societies where is a lot of that research then built and grown it's through our newsletters and our magazines and then into our journals so of course we do play absolutely pivotal role in the development of knowledge and the exchange of knowledge we're also engaged in the generation of new knowledge through our research funding programmes and many learned societies have small but important research funding programmes we fund £160,000 worth of early career grants in £10,000 slots so we are actively engaged in that and critically we have a very large knowledge exchange activity which sees us running research led seminars within the palace of Westminster at least once and often very many more times a year where the partners for the open days for DG Regio looking at regional policy across Europe working with practitioners and policymakers where it's the academics that are showcasing their work now this is part of what the learned societies do around the growth of knowledge and the exchange of knowledge which I'm sure you agree is terribly important and that does need to be funded so if a part of what I'm doing is saying let's make sure that in the development of open access monographs we build models that are economically sustainable then a little bit of me is not ashamed of that but we believe in the quality of the work that we do and that work does need to be funded in some way Thank you Just an additional point I couldn't agree more with what Jean-Claude has said and Rupert and other people about the importance of having a platform which is also some form of production and post publishing production of future work but that only increases the challenges of finding funding this is it's clear that let's say today there are very few projects that can have few MIT books in the natural science and the two examples I mentioned mine and Piketty's book that can afford putting that in place and they do it by mobilising resources that are not generalisable so I think really if I have a message to my former let's say not my former colleague but the colleague of the organisation for which I used to work is do consider the financing of putting in place these platforms open access based but with additional real innovation in functionality and sharing of the platforms between people because this is really a work we cannot afford I mean I'm sure there would be many flavours of it but we cannot afford to have each small publisher developing this they won't succeed in it and so you have some big experiments I know Lucy Montgomery is here maybe she will speak a bit about what's happening in China on which she has supervised great work in China you have grass root efforts that I mean big efforts at developing these new forms of platform for post publishing reviews for bettering the content after this is this is the process we are going to see also with players like Piol J but it should be that's where let's say public policy and society efforts should target their low means thank you we are out of time could you thank the panel very much for their round of applause


Today we take a look at the all-progressive Congress's readiness for July 16's governorship election in Oshun State and few dead two injured as bandits attacked Bihari's convoy en route, Dora. This is Plus Politics and I am Mary Anacor. As the clock ticks daily to the D-Day in Oshun State for the humanitarian elections and the flurry of political activities and intrigues that accompanied President Mohammed Bihari, Governor Babajideh Songolu of Lagos State, his Canoe State counterpart, Abdulahi Ganduje, and traditional monarchs, Heaven Dost, the candidature of Governor Adebuiga Uyitala for another term in office. Now the incumbent governor of the state who is seeking re-election said in a recent debate that workers have always received their full salaries since the start of his administration. Now ahead of the governorship polls, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, has also said that it has taken a tough stance on those planning to engage in vote-buying and vote-selling. The chairman spoke against the backdrop of alleged massive vote trading that characterized the just concluded Akiti State humanitarian elections vowing that the threat and the trend, I beg your pardon, would be curbed in Saturdays July 16th, governorship polls in Oshun and of course the 2023 general elections. Now joining me to discuss the happenings in Oshun is Olaneon Adebisi-Toke, he is a special advisor to Oshun State governor on works and transportation. Thank you so much for joining us. Good evening, Nigerians. You're welcome and thank you for having me. Great. Let's start by looking at Governor Oyetala's trend and all that he's done in his first tenure in office. He's obviously seeking a re-election and hoping that the votes of the people would bring him back in office. Why would the average Oshun person want to cast their votes for Governor Oyetala? Thank you very much. I think that the reason for reasonable electorates of Oshun State to have Governor Adebisi-Toke back in power is to show gratitude for his stalling performance in his first term in office. What I mean here is a man who came into power and as soon as he came to power he had a long gone battle for a year and after that you had COVID-19 that ravaged the whole world so that in totality we can see that he has spent something close to like two years doing the actual job of governor and within this span of three years he has done immediately well to improve the living conditions of the average Oshun State in the region. He started by ensuring that he puts a lot of priority to their welfare and healthcare by revitalizing more than 300 primary care centers, not only the physical structures but also the medical equipment, medications and the personnel, the complement of personnel to take care of these facilities. Then he met a huge infrastructure deficit on grant and he has so far as we speak now touched all the news and crannies of Oshun State in terms of improving the low conditions, the barral conditions, the metal grant. There are many roads that were last touched at something years ago, 34 years ago, 27 years ago. His excellency came in to work on these roads and today those communities are enjoying the dividends of democracy. Important cities like between Ada and Ibagio in the Oshun center like Muruiakuyu in the Oshun east. So all these facilities, the Oshubu, Higo road with the very limited long road, he has put them back to shame and everybody is happy with what he's been. He has done to muscle live well in the area of education, in the area of agriculture and in other important areas that deal with human welfare. So I think that the people of Oshun State are yearning to ask him but to come and repeat the magic performance indeed he has done in this first time in office. Let's break down some of the things because it's one thing to say oh the governor's done this and that. Let's break it down. You talked about the health facilities. Now in Nigeria back in the day it was very easy to work from your home to a health post. Now we're seeing a disappearance of those health posts and this was something that was accessible to the average person before they could go to the, you know, let's say the teaching hospital. That was most available to the simple person. What has Governor Yatala done in reviving those health posts and making sure that healthcare is available to the average person, not just in the city but of course in the rural areas? Yeah, thank you very much. In Oshun State we have 30 local government areas. What Governor Yatala has done is to ensure that there is one primary healthcare center in each ward so that you don't have to travel far from your house to go and receive healthcare services from the government hospital and that's a very huge plus for our people here because you don't have to travel any long distance there to reach the people that will take care of your health and that's bringing back the health facilities and care to the people at the grassroots level. So for me this is a very huge achievement which has been recommended by people to other states that are aspiring to also make their people happy. What is the monitoring process like? Because it's another thing to have these health posts opened and sometimes you have one doctor or one nurse and sometimes you see nobody, it's empty, it's very difficult to get access to somebody to attend to these people. Is there a monitoring system in place because it's what you can set these places up with cut the red tape and then have the jamboree but who oversees the day-to-day activities to make sure that it's really working and then the people can actually say that the government has done something. Well we have the commissioner for health and his team and they have a monitoring team that actually go around on a regular basis to ensure that these primary health care centers are actually serving the needs of the people. The health care centers are equipped with enough medications with doctors and nurses that actually serve the people. These are very viable facts and the people of Austrian state can bear witness to all they are saying is not sitting to anyone and then we go to any of the health care primary centers to see the people serving the interest of the people. Let's talk about agriculture. There is good land in Austrian state and the most of the most of 2021 several states in the southwest had issues with headers and of course farmers dealing with the conflict of the famines being encroached upon or you know destroyed. Austrian state was barely in the news for that but what has the government done in the area of agriculture to boost production? Thank you very much. Because of the peaceful nature of our governor he has set up a committee of farmers and headers so that there are no areas of conflict between them. So what we have in other states you don't have an industrial state wherever any dispute arises the committee comes in to set two things amicably between headers and farmers. So farmers and headers each group is doing their thing peacefully with our problem. Now the farmers in Austrian state particularly the young farmers the two of them were given loans and grants to work on the farms have given their nursery inputs like fertilizers and the government land to work on them. Same goes for those who are in the poultry industry. So it's something that is an ongoing thing and we are seeing improvement in the area of agriculture in our state. You are the special advisor on works and transportation. Let's talk about that. I was talking about infrastructural programs other than you know the health post that the primary healthcare that the governor has put in place for the people of Austrian state. What are the other things? We're looking at housing we're looking at transportation how has the government impacted in these areas? Well thank you very much. Let me first of all talk about the interventions of the government on the issue of road infrastructure. As we talk now the state government is working on about 64 roads across the states. When I mean when I say four roads I wrote it up into the computer ones the ongoing ones and the one yet to be awarded. Majorly we were able to construct a fly over within Oshubu township at the heart of Oshubu that's the popular liar intersection in order to reduce the rate of accidents and condition in that at that hall. We have been able to construct a 20 kilometer long stretch of road between Iyana Ara to Ejibu and also a rough five kilometers road within Ejibutanshi. We have been able to work on a 13 kilometer long road between Ara and Iguajo. This is a road that was not was touched last about 32-33 years ago. We have been able to work on and it's a long road at Miyakuyu, Ashipa until the end of Ibadari fair S-Fest bridge. That road was also touched 27 years ago. We have a long list of roads that have been completed. Once we met our grant we are still working on them and we are embarking on new roads to make life this day for the motor public in our state. That is as far as road infrastructure is concerned. Because we do not have too much time let's go into the politics of the APC and of course what people should expect for the election day. Now there has been talks about a reconciliation of sorts between the former governor and the sitting governor. But then as we speak we hear that they are yet to reconcile of course and this is a report that we got from the factional chairman of the All Progressive Congress in the state. Why is there a faction in the APC in Oshun state and if the governor obviously is the leader of the party in the state why is it taking so long for these lines to be blurred if you must win the election come on the 16th. Why has all those grounds not been covered? Well thank you very much. As far as I am concerned APC in Oshun state is one and the governor is the leader of our party in their Oshun state. That is number one. Number two in any situation in any circumstance there are always misunderstandings there are always disagreements and as brothers and sisters as members of the same family I will come around to sort this out ourselves. For me when people disagree on the basis of principle somehow sometimes they have to meet together to iron railways and work together and I believe that our party is the best. Has the governor Yatella made that attempt to reach out to the former governor to have that conversation because you're saying that they have to come together and make peace but has anybody done or taken the first step because again a house that is divided against itself cannot stand it's okay and diplomatic for you to say that the APC in your state is one but is it really it's all fine and well we hear that there have been some defections from the people's democratic party into the APC but is that a sign that the party is on the right track even when the house within itself is divided. Well what I am saying in a sense is this that the governor Alagisa Academy Yatella has always been a man that is peaceful that have been looking for means of putting the house in order so the moves are always ongoing but these are not things that you will see outside they are on the ground moves and that's what I told you that very soon you will see the outcome of all these peace moves from across the device. How much how much education of auto education has the APC been able to do within the state now Einik is talking about fears of insecurity and they're also talking about the issue of vote buying we saw what happened in a kitty state a lot of vote buying we're still hearing calls for a cancellation of that election what's the what what what's the hope that the APC would do right in this election knowing that it is the power the party in power would we see a strong arming of people in this election or are you going to allow it to be free for incredible. Well let me tell you that because of the sterling performance of APC in Oslo State we have embarked on a lot of voters as a session we have embarked on a lot of voter education so that our teaming supporters and members would not have to make any mistake this time around to avoid votes to avoid the other negative developments during the time of the election so I made a full suggestion on the field educating people going from hamlet to hamlet from less is to less city from township to township to educate our members and our supporters and the other members of the public voting public I will say that we do not have any intention to buy votes from anyone this is simply because our performance is there for a performance piece for us and people in this state are happy with APC government in power and they will not get engaged by anybody to sway their conscience to do something different so for me and for my party APC you do not have any plan to buy votes from anybody and we cannot show you that without even being that our people are so deep behind us and they will vote us back to power on the issue of security okay I believe that sorry go ahead go ahead I believe that I believe that people chat with the security of I've been doing relations are up to the task and they will do their job and my party APC is ready to cooperate with the security people to show free here relation in our state and does the government or will you give us your word as a representative of the government of Oshun state that the average voter will feel safe enough to go out and cast their votes without fear of any violence breaking out at any polling unit across the state we are confident that the average voter in Oshun state will feel secure enough to exercise their franchise their civic rights and duties to Nigeria all right well Olanio Adebisi Tauke is the special advisor to the Oshun state governor on works and transport thank you so much for discussing with us we appreciate your thoughts you are welcome my name is Olanio Adebisi Tauke all right Tauke thank you very much for speaking with us well that's it on this segment we'll take a quick break when we return we'll be looking at what happened in Dota of course the pre- team of mr president was attacked by 300 man terrorist gang we'll talk about it after this break


Hi everyone, Joe for jaspeyscasebreaks.com coming at you with 2017 Panini prism football four box blaster edition random team number three Big thanks all of these folks for getting in Appreciate it. There's all the teams right there Let's roll it. Let's randomize it hard for two and a two for the hard way one two three and four There we got Matthew all the way down to Derek, I know sorry Jeffrey We'll try to look out for more immaculate football but these days You know the the allocations have been so difficult to get a ton of which is why we always encourage everybody when you see Pre-orders go and get it because that group might be the only cases that we have and the next time we do get cases They're most likely be at a higher price So so it's it's the sharp play to get in early on those pre-orders two and a two four times for the teams one two three Four because after that it's pretty inconsistent when we're gonna see any of that again Especially at that price Atlanta down to Tampa Bay There's definitely must engage all of your fear of missing out fears When it comes to group rakes All right Matthew with the Falcons Chris with the Colts Roy with the Rams Vikings for Zachary Travis with the Bengals Nicholas with the Steelers Dwayne with the Dolphins Cardinals for Guy Gale with the Texans.  We just finished pack five But with the spot that he went back for chiefs We haven't seen him at homes yet Matthew with the Lions Alan with the Jets traps with the Seahawks Roy with the Pats Oliver Smith with the Eagles Gale with the Jaguars Lonnie Smith with the Ravens Oliver Soria with the Bears Shall be with the Bills Mike with my Raiders Brenton with the Titans and Derrick with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers All right, let's sort this by column B by team any trades All right, we'll pause the video really quick see if there's any See if there's any trades when we come back and then we'll have the break stick around Bears up for trade Colts All right some training going on. We'll be right back All right, welcome back everybody. There are a lot of trade chatter, but in the end no deals were done That's all good. Here it is four box blaster random team 3 2017 Panini prism football on a Saturday Thanks for spending your Saturday with us ladies and gentlemen. I appreciate that All right, let's see what we got. I wonder what hobby boxes of these cost now. Does anyone know? My home's rookie up possibilities in a hobby box Probably a million dollars a box. Oh someone let Matthew know that he's lagging by about five minutes Marty Marty ripped almost two boxes and Matthew saying lines up for trade And everyone make sure you're not lagging behind folks hit that live button. Make sure it's read Or refresh the page refresh your app. We'll get you to the current point of page CJ Bethard Golden Tate Disco those are not numbered, but I think they're exclusive to this set March on Lattimore for the same so that CJ Bethard goes to the Niners that'll be for Sunil March on Lattimore for the Saints goes to Jimmy Connell and we got for Chicago tried to trade couldn't trade mojo Adam Shay he And that is for That is for Oliver and the Bears No, no one's no one's gonna let Matthew know, huh, right? We've got Corey Davis. He's pretty good Titans Brent and young With Tennessee this Corey Coleman There's our Joshua Dobbs. He's a rocket scientist and there's Aaron Jones in that disco Refractor format Packers with a win today Saturday night Aaron Jones pretty good football player Brent and young with the Packers Juju Smith Schuster also a silver for the Steelers Nicholas Casper I think you were like well, you might not be any more Matthew, but you were lagging behind there's Nathan Peterman because when when you said you had the when you said lines up for trade I was already I had already ripped two boxes and had closed the trade window. I don't know. I'm sleeping Send that out. There's Jeremy McNichols premiere Jersey relic for the Buccaneers Derek Correct David. I think all the rookies are silvers in 2017 That goes to Derek and the Buccaneers And this is for the Niners that's for Sunil is Gary and Connelly For the Raiders that'll be for Mike the final two boxes All right last two boxes good. There's Jamal Adams for the Jets Robert Davis for the Redskins the Washington football team. That's for Roy Jamal Adams rookie for Allen and the Jets and More Jets our Dairy Stewart Jersey for for Allen once again. Where I need that not Kyler Murray Patra Mahomes 2017 prism this Chad Hanson To catch a pass Chad Chad Hanson not Chris Hanson catches predators Julio Jones Amara Darbo for Seattle that'll be for Travis Taiwan Taylor for the Titans. That's for Brenton Got that little that little stack left Devonte Mays for the Packers There's Joe Mixon. Nope. There's Ryan Switzer back there as well rookie car. There's Joe Mixon For Cincinnati that's gonna be for Travis Dow Ryan Switzer Danny Woodhead It's James Winston. That's a kid reporter card. Oh, there we go That's something then there's TJ Watt All right, so that Mahomes is not a rookie card Mahomes. I don't think That insert has as much value, but it's still a Mahomes There's TJ Watt Steelers that'll be for Nicholas Casper and here is rookie introductions Patrick Mahomes That's for the Chiefs. That's for Colton Carver who won that in pack number four still something So I'm sure it'll go For way better than any of the other rookie introductions cards and there you have it ladies and gentlemen We're still hunting for the regular rookie card, but there it is right there Random Team 3 2017 prism football in the books Thanks for watching folks That's four box blaster random team number three Jasper's case breaks calm. Bye. Bye


Hey everybody, Dr. O, and this is going to talk about how we perceive the world around us. I like to call this the neural arc. I actually use the same five steps to explain the reflex arc. The only difference is the information is going to be processed in the conscious reaches of your mind here instead of in the spinal cord, like with the regular spinal reflexes. So there are five steps. You'll see here it's talking about upper and lower motor neurons. I don't really worry about that at this point. So here we see number one. We have these peripheral sensory receptors in our skin, primarily the temperature receptors or thermal receptors we're worried about here. So step number one, there's a stimulus that's going to activate those receptors. And then the activation of those receptors is going to send information down a afferent or sensory nerve. So here we see the sensory nerves are going to be the blue ones there that are going to send that signal up towards the brain. Now this was a reflex. It would just turn around at the spinal cord and you would respond. But in this case, we're going to go all the way to our primary sensory cortex, which is the post-central gyrus of our parietal lobe. So the sensory receptor has been triggered and now it's sending a signal up that sensory nerve. Step three is where information is going to be processed. This is what makes reflexes different from our conscious perception like we're talking about here. So you see on the screen there it says the sensory pathway reaches the cerebral cortex for conscious perception. If it feels good, we're going to know it feels good. If it feels bad, too hot or too cold, then we're going to have to respond, right? But either way, we're now consciously aware of what's going on, which means this information has traveled up those sensory nerves to our filter, the thalamus. The thalamus has passed this information on to the primary sensory cortex, which is the post-central gyrus of the parietal lobe and the sensory association areas. So now we have to decide what to do, right? We've all taken a shower. If the water feels perfect, then we put our head in it. If it's too hot or too cold, we're going to respond differently by changing the temperature. But now we're going to travel back the other way. So now the motor nerves have been activated. So that's going to be the red nerves here.  So this started with the receptor, then a sensory nerve, then the information was processed. Now we have a motor nerve involved until we reach the effector, which is going to be, in this case, this is a somatic response. So it's going to be your skeletal muscle. So either quickly pulling your hand away and turning the temperature of the water up or down because it was too hot or too cold, or again, putting your head in there and starting to take your shower. So that's called the neural arc. So really what's cool about this is that it's so similar to reflexes is that these complex neurological pathways and all these higher order functions that we have have just been built on these reflexive pathways. So it shouldn't surprise you that there's not any real huge differences. Okay. So I hope this helps. That's what I call the neural arc or how we respond to our environment. Have a wonderful day. Be blessed.