From Reopen to Reinvent: (Re)Creating School for Students

So, Michael, prior to the spring of 2020, higher ed was notorious for its glacial pace of change. But the pandemic really gave institutions permission to think differently. Everything from the academic calendar to how they deliver education.

Yeah, thinking differently was true in basically every industry. As you know, Jeff, as Covid upended healthcare, retail, and of course, the industry entire life cycle of education, not just in higher ed, but from elementary schools all the way through higher ed. Innovation was no longer a buzzword. It was the only word. And schools needed to change quickly. And a favorite word of yours, Jeff? Pivot to deliver on their core missions.

Yeah, Michael, there isn't really much from the early days of COVID that most of us would like to keep. But as a catalyst for change, I think the pandemic really put us in a mindset for accelerated experience, experimentation. So, Michael, you released a new book this past summer called From Reopen to Recreating School for Every Child. And what makes From Reopen to Reinvent stand out for me is how constructive it is. You don't just talk about the need for change. You really provide educators with practical examples and roadmaps. And so today we're going to expand our look at education and dip into change in K12 on this episode of Future youe.

This episode is brought to you by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, working to eliminate race, ethnicity and income as predictors of student success through innovation, data and information policy, and institutional transformation. This episode of Future youe is sponsored by Ascendium Education Group, a non profit organization committed to helping learners from low income backgrounds reach their education and career goals. For more information, visit ascendiumphilanthropy.org subscribe to Future youe wherever you get your podcasts. And follow us on Twitter at the Handle FutureYou podcast. And if you enjoy the show, please give us a five star rating so others can discover the conversations we're having about higher education.

I'm Michael Horn.

And I'm Jeff Salingo. So we've done this a few times in the six seasons of this podcast where one of us takes off our co host hat and that person is really the guest. And today it's Michael's turn to do that. So, Michael, your new book, From Reopen to Reinvent, not only tackles K through 12 change, but many of the concepts and recommendations. And it can also be applied to much of higher ed. So let's jump in with a question I think every author gets the first time they write a book is so why did you write this?

I love the question. Jeff, and thanks for letting me be on the hot seat today. You know, honestly, when the pandemic hit, Diane Tavener, who has led Summit public schools for 20 years, and I started this podcast called Class Disrupted. Not to too time on you, Jeff, but just because it was more focused on K12 and we were getting all these questions from parents that were like, what the heck is going on? Why does school work this way? Like, this makes no sense. Why does my kid have so many worksheets? All these sorts of questions, right? And all these people simultaneously were like, we can't go back to normal. We have to do it differently when we start to come and reopen schools and so forth. And honestly, I got frustrated because people are returning to normal and they're abandoning changes. And yeah, there was a lot that was not ideal, obviously about the couple years that have been interrupted by the pandemic. But I think that they can give us a gateway to really rethinking some of these fundamental precepts in K12 education that hold students in place, hold them back. And so I really wanted to write a useful book that said, hey, here's a vision for how it can be better for each and every student and here's a pathway that you can actually implement it and create some capacity, given all that districts are under right now.

So the book starts off with this strong argument that K through 12 schools should abandon their zero sum mindset, the notion that for every winner there's a loser, and instead move to something you call a positive sum system, in which there the pie grows larger as individuals achieve success. You write, a big benefit from moving to a positive sum system is that instead of competing to be the best, as in a zero sum game, you compete to be unique. And that this is in fact how much of our world operates today. And education in many ways is sort of the anomaly. But I'll note that one reason why it's such an anomaly is because education really has this scarcity mindset that there are only a certain number of seats at the top to be won, if you will. And as you know, I've long said that this is really a higher ed problem, and it's a higher ed problem in certain ways, somewhat unique to the United States, where we really think that the, the best school should only have a few seats and there's just fewer seats for so many, so many of the top people today. So, Michael, can we really move to a positive some education system unless we tackle this question in higher ed?

Jeff I think it's an insightful question. I mean, K12 education is fundamentally a dependent system on higher ed. And we've awfully narrowed the game of what success looks like to quote unquote, getting into good colleges, right? And when those colleges are selective and small, to your point, I. We've really created actual scarcity, not just perceived scarcity. And so in many ways, I think that's the beginning of that zero sum system. And I think that's all right. And I think the book in that way is a call out for higher ed to change the game as well. I mean, you know, Joseph Ioun told us, and we've quoted it several times, that higher ed institutions are not really differentiated. And yet we all talk to high schoolers and we tell them, look for, you know, the college that fits you. Where's the real fit? But it's awfully hard for those high schoolers when they look at a lot of schools that look pretty freaking similar. And I don't think it helps the colleges, which is part of the argument. Jeff. I think that lack of differentiation actually constrains their recruiting. It makes them play this game themselves that is getting increasingly hard in an era of demographic declines and people being skeptical about college. And I think there's this concept of, of distance traveled or what in K12 circles we would call value added growth or individual growth. And you know, like as use mission, right, about being able to serve any learner regardless of that starting point. And so if we're serious about competing to be the most unique person you can be, developing people into the best versions of themselves, then I think higher ed has a ton of work to do. And your question, frankly, it's a really good push. At the same time, there are a ton of things that K12 can do to take some steps down this path. And a huge piece of that in my mind is moving to mastery based learning, or what's often called competency based, right. In higher ed, where we say that all students will learn and we're going to embed success in the environments for all learners such that it's not like the zero sum game where it's I win, you lose, but let me help you show, show you. Like this is how I mastered this and now let me help you master it too. And let's celebrate how we've started to move in these different directions. And I think there's some promising signs on that, like Mastery Transcript Consortium, for example, working with a lot of colleges and universities working lot of K12 schools, they're allowing learners to create Portfolios showing mastery in sort of their unique. Right. Set of things that they have done. And I wonder, could it be disruptive to the College Board if fewer people are taking the sat? It's harder to get legion. Maybe the mastery transcript says like, hey RISD, we've got like the 10 best artists in the country and they can show you their portfolio. You go recruit them and Olin College here you go find the engineers and BAPs and the entrepreneurs and on and on. One, I think maybe, you know, I think K12 has an obligation to be at the table and try to change this.

Yeah. So this is exactly where I wanted to move to next. Mastery based learning is, is something you do make a huge push for. Why is this so central in your mind to reform and how does it relate into higher ed as, as you say, you call it mastery based learning instead of competency based education, which is. Is the term used in higher ed. Are they really that different?

Yeah. So up front to say Most people in K12, I think also call it competency based education. The reason I reframed it is I think for a parent perspective, if you hear competency based education, who wants to just be competent? Number one. Number two, I think it sounds wonky. Whereas mastery based, I sort of get it right as a layperson. And then third, in higher ed circles at least, competency based education is often equated with this notion of direct assessment for prior learning. Whereas from my perspective, I want to talk about that, but what I really want to talk about is that we're moving from this time based system to one where we're going to do whatever it takes to make sure that you master the critical knowledge, skills, competencies, ability to do things and that success, that learning is going to be guaranteed. And, and therefore we're creating a more rigorous learning system that this is actually better for learning itself. And it changes the mindset, Jeff, of how you serve students. Right. Like no longer are you sitting there saying, hey, some of these students are going to get it, some of these aren't right. I'm sitting there evaluating which of them are and so forth. Instead, I'm going to put whatever resources I need to bring to bear to make sure that students are going to master the material. And I'll say Western Governor's University in the higher ed sector. I think it's a, I talk about it a lot in the book. It's a major inspiration for how to do this well, where they don't have teachers being the graders of their own students. And I Think higher ed actually has done some things in mastery based learning around rigor and around industry certifications and things of that nature that K12 needs to look at as they start to think about this.

Yeah. So, Michael, we haven't even gotten into the heart of some of your probably more radical recommendations, but these two ideas alone, granted, they're interrelated, require some really significant shifts. And K through 12 and higher ed are both under enormous pressure at the moment. So how do you create that capacity to make these changes?

Yeah, so this is something you and I have talked about a lot on the show, Jeff, is the importance of creating a separate team that has the authority to rethink the resources, the processes, the revenue formula. Right. The importance of autonomy is just critical in creating. And the framework that I use is really adapted from Clark Gilbert. He calls it dual transformation. In other parts of the literature, it's called the ambidextrous organization. There's all sorts of names for this that academics have in higher ed actually have studied and created. But the basic notion is, hey, the core teaching and learning experience, you're going to keep doing what you do, right? Make it better, continue to deliver that great experience. And by the way, for K12 districts, that means, like, people are going to be coming into school board meetings and yelling at the superintendent about what they're teaching or mask mandates or all that stuff. And like, you're taking those arrows right from the public as you continue to deliver on your core, you know, offering, so to speak, but start to empower these small outside groups, you know, just a couple educators, to create a micro school, to create a pod, to do a class very differently from how you've ever done it, and start to enable them to rethink the enterprise. And then as they're successful, if they're successful, more people are going to want to join. You know, we. We often say in sports, success is the best deodorant. I think success is the best attractor in education. More people want to be part of something that starts to take these principles and put it into place.

And one of your case studies in the book actually is drawn from higher ed on this.

Yeah, exactly. Look, Southern New Hampshire University, I think, is the textbook example for doing this well in higher ed. First, you know, their online division. In the early 2000s, when Paul LeBlanc came in as president and realized, we gotta do something, he made that independent. And as is famously known, he moved it to a different part of the campus, right, separate from the traditional faculty, and said, hey, you go grow, build very different processes for serving these adult learners who need very different supports and so forth. And they did it miraculously and now 180,000 plus students or whatever they are in their enrollment. And then Paul did it again during the pandemic actually with basically the relaunch of their campus based institution that combines competency based learning with that coming of age experience and drastically reduces the price that students are paying. And he basically said, hey, this team that's doing it, this is your full time job. You do not have obligations to the traditional campus based offering to the traditional online offering. Your full time job is to design, build, operate and launch this division. Because if it's not your full time job, the urgent and like all those other things that that are important on a college campus or in a K12 district are going to get in their way and you're not going to prioritize this with the thought and care that it deserves to really recreate or really reinvent something from scratch.

Michael there's so much more to dig in into this book and so let's take a brief break and when we come back we'll tackle improving the student experience and we're also going to talk more about how to actually do innovation in higher ed. We'll be right back.

This episode of Future you is sponsored by Ascendium Education Group, a nonprofit organization committed to helping learners from low income backgrounds reach their education and career goals. Ascendium believes that system level change and a student centric approach are important important for our nation's efforts to boost post secondary education and workforce training opportunities. That's why their philanthropy aims to remove systemic barriers faced by these learners, specifically first generation students, incarcerated adults, veterans, students of color, adult learners and rural community members. For more information visit ascendiumphilanthropy.org

this episode is being brought to you by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Today's college students are more than just students. They are workers, parents and caregivers and neighbors. And colleges and universities need to change to meet their changing needs. Learn more about the Foundation's efforts to transform institutions to be more student centered@usprogram.gatesfoundation.org. So welcome back to Future youe where we're talking about Michael's new book From Reopen to Reinvent and it's Lessons for Higher Ed. So Michael, in the book you talk about what students want out of school, the so called student experience, and what strike me is how similar it is to what I found in my work in higher ed. You write for example, that first, students want to do things that help them feel successful, and second, they want to do things that help them have fun with friends. Now you put different words around it, but in higher ed I call this purpose. You know, why are you there? You want to be successful and belonging. We want to have fun doing it and we want to feel like we found our community. Now, in higher ed, if you don't have bold, it's very likely you're not going to persist as a, as a student. It seems like such an easy job to be done by school to improve the student experience. But time and time again, schools really fall so short on these two jobs. Why is that?

Yeah, so first, I totally agree with the insight and I totally agree with the parallel. I think the one interesting thing is in K12, the purpose, why are you there? Students don't often ask it because it's just assumed that they're there. And so the successful piece sort of remains, but they're not always so sure about the purpose. One, it's, it's much more present, I think, in higher ed. But in terms of the bigger question of like, why do they fall short in these two jobs, I think it's all how the system is built, right? It's, it's, you know, the opportunities for success, for example, are only occur say in a K12 environment every few weeks when you have an exam and often they're graded on a curve. So many students feel like a failure. That's certainly true in higher ed as well. You think about the opportunities to have fun with friends, right? In K12 environments, they occur in extracurriculars, which tells you everything you need to know about how it's being viewed by the school is sort of, that's the outside of school thing, right? Where you can have fun on the athletic fields or, or in arts environments and things of that nature. And you know, collaboration is called cheating, right? In school or. I think a lot of times people looked at my first book, Disrupting Class, and they said, at last, Michael has written an autobiography of his middle school years, right? Because you get in trouble for when you disrupt class or you have fun with friends in the middle of class. And so I think the way schools are designed actually systematically try to pull out the success opportunities or pull out these opportunities to have fun with friends to all the things that surround the learning experience, but are not in fact embedded in the learning experience itself. And it gets back to the zero sum verse versus positive sum framing, frankly. Right. That like for every winner, there's a loser. Well, by definition you've built a system then that says only certain students will be successful. And so I actually make the argument in the book that, you know, there's a lot of schools that I suspect would say, like, no, we value each and every success of every single student. But I would argue that as long as we're stuck in these models, these processes of a zero sum system, this time based learning system, it's actually impossible to truly do that. And I'll just take one example that relates to higher ed, which is, you know, teachers, when they, when they recommend students for college, you know this better than I do. They have a form that they fill out in addition to the recommendation that they write. And typically there's this question, is this student someone who is in the top 1%, the top 5%, the top 10%, the top 50% or whatever of students you've ever taught? So by definition you are judging the student there against others and not saying every single student is successful.

Jeff Michael, you encourage us in the book to move beyond the notion of learning loss. Now this is a phrase I must admit I've used a lot during the pandemic and I've been in environments where academics will often protest its use as deficit thinking that lowers expectations for students. Now I must admit I was surprised that you were critical of this phrase. So how should we frame what students didn't get during the pandemic?

So are you saying I'm going soft?

Is that. I didn't want to say that, but yeah, like.

So look, I'll, I'll say I've used Leard of gloss as well because it is what it is at some level, right. And just calling it by another name, I don't think is constructive. But I grew tired quickly of the phrase during the pandemic and during the class disrupted podcast because of that deficit mindset. And I'll say this is how I thought about it though. We talked about the dual transformation and importance of autonomy before. What we didn't talk about was Clark Gilbert's original theory around threat rigidity. And he basically said that when a threat appears in the environment, it's really important to frame it as a threat because otherwise you don't get the attention of an organization, you don't dedicate resources to tackling it. But if you leave it in that threat framing, then top down response results where you're basically button down the hatches, you do this command and control response, just implementing what you have before and you don't see real Innovation to tackle this threat. And so I think this is how I think about learning loss, which is. It's really important. It was really important to frame it that way up front because we wouldn't have gotten the unprecedented investment of federal dollars and everyone saying, we really got to figure out how to get these students back up to speed. At the same time, if we leave it in that framing, it's incredibly demotivating to students. You know, we talked about earlier, students want to feel successful. Well, let's talk about how much you've lost and how much you're behind that makes them feel like failures, which is not going to help them get back on track. And instead, it's not that I want to hide from this reality, but I think if we move to this mastery mindset where we're guaranteeing mastery, we start to build a success cycle where we say, hey, you are where you are on your learning journey. Let's figure out how you take that next step and be successful, and then the next step after that and build on your mastery and the background knowledge you have acquired during this time so that we can actually accelerate your learning and really get everyone successful.

Okay, so let's get down to some tactics here. So when I visited campuses or in the last couple of weeks when I've hosted dinners for senior college leaders in various cities, one thing I'll hear over and over again is, you know, we know what to do. The question is, now, how do we do it? And in the book, you tell the story of the Toyota Prius when the car maker could not use its existing functional teams and hierarchical rules of production because the hybrid, as you say, you know, constituted a completely different architecture. You know, so much of what we're talking about here is a completely different architecture. You know, what do colleges, universities, and schools need to do? Do they need to throw away their existing structures, which, I might add, do keep their legacy product going, or do they do something else to get this stuff done?

Yeah. So, I mean, it goes back. Right. First to that dual transformation and Southern New Hampshire approach at first, which is don't throw away what you're doing, because whatever you're going to launch, like, not every innovation you launch is going to work. You need a few shots at goal, basically. Right. Like a portfolio approach. And so that first step, I think, is all about adding capacity like we discussed. And that capacity, these new, new things that you are creating, have to have the freedom to rethink the resources, the processes, the revenue formula, everything. And the great example of that, you know, Prius story that you just relayed is that basically when they created the Prius, the Toyota folks said they took all the people from different parts of the different engineers of creating their traditional cars. And they said bring your subject matter expertise, but not your loyalty to your department or how things have been done. Because as you're creating this, you might realize actually this part that I've always worked on is irrelevant to the car of the future I'm creating. Or in the case of the Prius, right, like you step on the brake, it doesn't just slow down the car, it actually creates power that charges the battery. And all these novel things that you would not have been able to figure out if you had loyalty to the way things have been done in your department. So that's number one for message for higher ed. The second step is then how you build out the idea once you put into action. And in the book I talk a lot about this discovery driven planning notion, which is from Rita McGrath at Columbia and Ian McMillan at University of Pennsylvania. And basically it's the foundation for what's known as lean startup. But it essentially says when you're launching something that's unfamiliar and you haven't done it before, rather than just go out and do a traditional strategic plan and launch it, you should instead say, okay, what does it have to look like when it's fully baked for us to be excited about this? And what are all the assumptions we're making that have to prove true for that to actually occur? And then let's go test the assumptions before we implement the plan. And if the assumptions prove true, then we can actually get the vision in place. And the story I actually love telling about this to K12 audiences too is actually a higher ed story. Jeff, which is when Udacity, the MOOC provider, Sebastian Thrun founded company, they were making all this hype around lowering the cost of education and making it better and so forth. And Governor Jerry Brown California announced that we're going to partner with Udacity on like it was like a $2 billion initiative or something like that to redo the way like entry level courses at San Jose State University or something like that come together, right? They made this huge announcement on the capital steps and it was going to solve all of higher ed's problems. And like two years later it was a total failure. And some of the reasons it was a failure is like the students that they were serving didn't have Internet connections, they didn't have computers. And it's like you could have tested those assumptions before you wasted all that money in political capital. So, so that's, that's the first thing is like focus on the tests first before you implement. It's really the scientific method. And then the last piece, and I'll just be brief on this, is that the other piece that I tackle a lot on is what we call the tools of cooperation, which is how do you create change when people on a campus or in a school or any organization disagree on how the world works, like, what leads to what results and what the goals are for your enterprise? And basically it says, like, there are lots of tools of leadership and management. Some of them work some of the time, none of them work all of the time. And you have to figure out what situation you are in to figure out which tools are actually useful or relevant. And I'm actually going to be applying this to higher ed, Jeff, in a paper that's coming out while we're doing this podcast this fall, which is going to have case studies of transformation at Southern New Hampshire University. So how Paul LeBlanc really wielded the power of separation, I call it, with the online division Simmons University, which, you know, we've had the past president Helen Drynan on around their efforts with 2U and online education, Yale University and the launch of NUS Singapore, the Yale Singapore Partnership that they had, that Rick Levin did and Northeastern University and their climb into the rankings that you've written about as, as well. And so I think it'll break down. But, but the idea is figure out which area of agreement or not you are in and then what that implies for which leadership and management tools will or will not, more importantly, work.

So, Michael, I don't want to leave today without talking about the role of technology and how you write about technology in this book, because we both have young kids now. Mine are about to turn 13 and 11 this fall. So I don't know if I could really describe them as young anymore. And we all know parenting is hard, but one thing I think we did pretty well as control technology in our house when our kids were young. And then of course, the pandemic hit and all the rules went out the window, in part because they were doing remote learning on one hand and in part because it was really a way for them to make social connections with friends and family outside of our house. And so in some ways, I think all of us parents out there saw the good role technology can play in education during the pandemic. And as you say, digital learning has arrived and it's only going to grow. So how should it be used in schools? Maybe maybe some highlights from elementary through college about how the role of technology in schools.

Yeah, and I like this question, Jeff, also, because I think I'm often thought of as the tech person in any room I go to and I'm actually not a technology for technology's sake. And like you with our kids who are 8 years old now by the time this airs, the, you know, I we've been very cautious about how much tech they have at a young age and sort of gradually introduce it. And I think that's the thing for schools, which is not too much while you're young, always in balance. They should be spending time outdoors, they should be learning how to interact in the real world outside of technology. But we also need to be deliberate and teach about that balance and about digital citizenship and more because as you live life, you and I live our lives digitally. That's how we probably buy a lot of things. That's how we interact. We record over this. And how will students know how to use technology well, if we don't intentionally teach it? And so my argument is that particularly as students get older, broadband device that's connected to the Internet, et cetera, I think becomes more and more table stakes. Not all of school, but for large parts of it, because it's something that they have to learn how to use. It's part of their learning. They have to learn how to research and write and do all these things on and develop digital skills, frankly. And you know, so back to the thing like if you're in elementary school, maybe 30 minutes a day at most, because it's good for certain things. But as you get older, I think it's a little bit more and learning to use it responsibly so you don't get this social media addicted, smartphone phone addicted. Right generation that I think a lot of parents are grappling for. Just quick rules of thumb for educators, though, as they think about that for teachers themselves, I think tech should do one of three things. It ought to save them time, it ought to extend their reach, or it ought to deepen their understanding of their students. If it doesn't do that, scrap it. And more broadly, at a school level or from an administrator perspective, the three things that I say it ought to do are provide feedback for students and teachers, rapid feedback so that they can improve learning and performance. Second, offer experience hard to offer in the immediate environment. So courses you may not be able to offer or, you know, we had the president of morehouse on this podcast. And he talked about how with virtual reality he can do labs that only his students could do if they had been in MIT before. And then third, automate those manual laborious processes to do a lot of frankly what you talk about in the higher ed world, which is create a more seamless student experience.

I like those rules of three. It's easy for us to remember now, Michael, but we can't avoid the elephant in the room. We're recording this at the end of the summer, so summer break is almost over. But you argue for year round schooling, which I think will likely make you public enemy number one in the 5 to 18 year old demographic because my kids do not want to go back. But you know, this really does make sense to educators. Can you explain why? And is it, is it time to abandon the traditional summer break in, in higher ed too?

Now you're getting into the parts where I'm actually called radical.

I like it.

So look, I, I think there's a couple things to unpack. First of all, one, that historically what we call the agrarian calendar is not in fact agrarian, that students who were in farming communities in, in the 1800s and before, actually their breaks were in the spring when they were doing planting for farming, and in the fall when they were harvesting, they were in school in the summer and winter when, when you didn't really need them. So our notion of this agrarian calendar is not correct. And students actually in urban environments, I talk about this history, they went to school year round in the 1800s, those who were enrolled. What changed was that, you know, before air conditioning, it was awfully hot in these, in a lot of these environments. And so families with means, to be frank, started escaping to the countryside, started escaping to the seashore, to the mountains and so forth for cooler weather during the school year. And educators, labor unions and others sort of doubled down on this and made it part of what we think of as the schooling calendar. And what I argue is that first for parents, this is actually really hard. So if you're a low income parent, you've got to figure out what to do with your child from a child care, from a, you know, sort of productivity perspective. During the summer, a lot of learning loss can happen. There's a lot of challenges for families without those means. They often don't have the social capital to know which programs to even sign up for which camps, let alone the income means. If you're a parent though, who's well off. Jeff, this is really stressful as well. Like you probably like us have the spreadsheet for the summer trying to figure out all the different mosaic of camps and summer breaks and who cares for who and who picks up when. And like, you have to sign up by, like, December, and who knows if your kid's even going to even like that activity by June that they liked in December. And there's all this stress of cramming in all this stuff. And basically what I'm ultimately suggesting is a more balanced calendar where you still have breaks, right? But now it's like every nine or 12 weeks, you get two weeks off, which I actually think is a better deal for a lot of students. And it's certainly, I think, a better deal for a lot of educators because it gives them more opportunities to refresh and not get burned out. And for your kids and my kids that, yes, have enjoyed their summer and me that enjoyed my summer growing up, I don't think it's eliminating these important breaks, but I think it's changing the relationship with them.

Of course, the entire travel industry will be pushing back against that.

That's the biggest one, right?

I, I and I think it's the biggest one right in here. In Maryland, we had the Ocean City rule, and down in Virginia, they had the King's Dominion rule. Right. Because it was, it was meant to really try to protect those, those industries. So, Michael, last question as we wrap up. And similar to something we asked Anya Kamenetz when she was on the show about her book. So how should colleges be preparing for this generation of students who are going to be going through a lot of these changes in K through 12 and then getting into a higher ed system that is maybe just different than what those students experienced in K12.

It's a great question, Jeff. And my take is that even as I don't want to say learning loss in the K12 schools themselves, they have to know that these students are coming not just with learning loss, but with a bunch of social, emotional, other deficits, right, that have harmed them or hurt them in all sorts of ways, which will make them different. To be clear, they also will bring some assets that past students did not, right around, potentially around perseverance and grit and things like that of navigating difficult moments. But they're going to have some trauma, they're going to have some real loss on a variety of circumstances. And I think in some ways, the book talks about the need for K12 schools to backward integrate, to do things that they didn't think were historically part of the K12 school mission. I think higher ed institutions are going to have to do something similar, take very serious stock of how do we provide a variety of offerings that we historically perhaps have not thought was core to what we did. And yes, there's some of those that you can outsource with public private partnerships and things of the nature like mental health. But let's be honest, I think faculty are going to be the front line of some of these and we're going to actually have to think about how to help them or equip them with the skill sets to know how to respond to a student who maybe talks to them or doesn't talk to them with a whole range of challenges and how to get them that support that they need to be successful.

So, Michael, perhaps the most important question where can listeners learn more about the this book?

Yeah. So look, if, if you go to the From Reopen to Reinvent website page, which is off of michaelbhorn.com it's it's on the front there. And we'll add that to the show notes. JEFF Right. We get to do that. So you can download, you can find out more where to buy the book, Amazon and all those places. Right. It's, it's in the normal places you buy your book, but there's also a free Reopen to Reinvent bookmark which has QR codes that Link to all 29 of the videos that are used in the book. JEFF and they feature a variety of K12 schools, but also colleges and universities. So Minerva's in there, Southern New Hampshire's in there. There's a bunch of videos that I hope will be helpful for our audience.

Well, Michael, you're as good of a guest as you are a co host. So thank you for joining me this week on Future youe. That's all we have time for for but please get this book. It's a it's a really important book, I think, to people in higher ed as well in learning the lessons that that they could apply on their campuses as well. So thank you all out there for being with us and join us next time on future. You.

It.