The web-site is now in readonly mode. Login and registration are disabled. (28 June 2019)

WED: Open Turf: The effective use of Web 2.0 technologies in creating a collaborative platform for self-determined learning (Chris Gray)

Cloud created by:

Chris Gray
9 January 2016

Online innovations in the form of Web 2.0 tools are ubiquitous, whilst the pace of technological and social change in society appears relentless. How can educators and adult learners embrace these changes to meet the needs of a modern society and workplace? This presentation looks at what is required to create an engaging and collaborative learning environment that meets these challenges.

Workers need to keep skills up-to-date and relevant in the rapidly changing employment market of the 21st Century, whilst educators need to respond to provide them with effective opportunities for life-long learning (Rahimi et al, 2015).

Continuing to rethink the most appropriate way to encourage adult learners, especially those wishing to further their vocational knowledge and skills, is a constant challenge for educators. This project explores the application of research into heutagogy, or self-determined learning. This approach to learning is built on existing pedagogies and which can, according to Blaschke (2012) and others, be especially suitable for distance education where new web technologies are utilised.

There are many online tools which can facilitate the learning process. I draw on recent research, by Song and Lee (2014), that shows how Web 2.0 tools can revitalise learning. Ensuring that the right blend of tools are utilised is an important criterion in facilitating successful learner engagement and I demonstrate a practical application of these tools.

The potential success of openness in education relies on the effectiveness of a sharing and collaborative environment. This can be significantly influenced by what people give and contribute and not just take, which Weller (2011) terms ‘shifted reciprocity’: By having an engaging and immersive platform, a positive reciprocal atmosphere can arise.

Whilst social, collaborative,  learning can be shown to benefit from the use of Web 2.0 tools, there are clearly challenges within this emerging field of online learning. This presentation offers solutions to some of these challenges, with the ultimate aim being how to develop effective collective learning.

This multimedia presentation, in SlideShare, provides an innovative approach to the interconnections of Web 2.0 tools, open education and the practical application of self-determined learning.

The project artefact consists of a web-platform, Open Turf, which has been conceived as a Collaborative Learning Environment (CLE), to demonstrate the explored interconnections. To further enhance the value of the project I have used the learning requirements of the new Level 2 Apprenticeship Standard developed by the Groundsmanship trailblazer group; the reason being to illustrate how this approach could be applied to any, or most, learning outcomes or courses.

The project artefact and presentation can be used to generate discussion in the areas explored and can also form the basis for educators to contribute in the design and deployment of a comprehensive online immersive learning platform which will engage and enthuse learners.

Key words: Web 2.0, open education, collaborative learning, heutagogy, self-determined learning, online learning, web-platform.

Extra content

The poster for this conference presentation is hosted on Padlet and can be viewed here

Chris Gray
15:41 on 16 January 2016 (Edited 15:42 on 16 January 2016)

An extended abstract for my project can be found on my blog at

Chris Gray
19:31 on 17 January 2016

Useful material for consideration when developing Web 2.0 learning platforms; A 56 minute video.

Wheeler, S. (2014), “Digital Age Learning - The Changing Face of Online Education” , presentation for  CSEDU, International Conference on Computer Supported Education, 03-04-2014

Chris Gray
10:42 on 23 January 2016

Useful background SlideShare presentation on an approach to better engage adult learners in the digital environment.

Blaschke, L. M. (2015), "Heutagogy: Changing the Playing Field", presentation for ICDE Pre-Conference Workshop 25.10.2015.

Chris Gray
10:44 on 23 January 2016 (Edited 10:45 on 23 January 2016)

Interesting observations given in a SlideShare presentation on digital learning in an open environment.

Rolfe, V. (2015), "Open education projects – through the lens of innovation", presentation for OpenEd 2015 Conference, Vancouver 19-21 November 2015.

Chris Gray
10:49 on 23 January 2016

The following provides the planned narrative for each slide for the conference presentation.

A different font version is also available as a pdf download which is available on my blog and which has been created using the open dyslexia font. 

Open University: H818 Conference Presentation: February 2016.

Innovation theme.


"OpenTurf: The effective use of Web 2.0 technologies in creating a collaborative platform for self-determined learning".

 by Chris Gray, MSc(M:MT)(Open), 17th February 2016.

Slide 1: Presentation title

I’d like to welcome everyone to my presentation, which is on the innovation theme.

It provides an overview of the research for the project and insight into its development.

Slide 2: Introduction

I’ve divided the presentation to cover:

  •  How the idea arose;

  •  Why the project is relevant to today’s learning environment;

  •  The three different threads I’ve explored to create the web platform, and

  •  a graphic tour of the different parts of the platform that I’ve created.

Slide 3: Embracing change (1)

The idea arose from an identified need, and desire:

  •  to encourage the learning process within my industry;

  •  to provide a way to facilitate active learning and for owning a learning journey; and

  •  to create a web platform that acts as a hub for social and learning connections.

Why though is there a need to embrace change, especially in learning?

Two key reasons:


  1. To keep your skills up-to-date, in order to develop what are termed 21st century skills, which Rahimi and others (2015), identify as:
  • critical thinking,

  • problem solving,

  • meaning making,

  • communication,

  • collaboration, and

  • decision making.

    All of these are much in demand by employers.

    2. Digital technology has also been identified by the World Economic Forum as being a significant driver in the transformation of jobs and business activities and models (WEF, ‘The Future of Jobs’, 2016).

    I have developed my idea using the new Level 2 Apprentice Standard (SFA, 2015) for a Sports Turf Operative to show how these needs can be encouraged in practice.

Slide 4: Embracing change (2)

From a tutor perspective we need to:

  •  Increase opportunities for life-long learning by embracing digital technologies in learning design (Blaschke, 2012), and

  •  Use digital technology, in particular Web 2.0 and Social Media, to positively engage with and encourage active learning.

    The positive impacts of appropriate digital learning are well evidenced. However, implementing them in a learning environment may be a challenge for some tutors. (Song & Lee, (2014), (Vorvoreanu, et al (2015), (Matzat & Vrieling (2015).

Slide 5: Web 2.0 tools: What are they?

To help set the scene a little we need to understand the meaning of the term ‘Web 2.0 tools’.

Essentially there are hundreds, if not thousands, of digital applications, or functions, that facilitate:

  •  user interaction,

  •  content generation and sharing,

  •  ease of contribution to an online discussion,

  •  and the development of a network or community.

    Examples include Twitter, Youtube, Instagram, SlideShare, blogging tools, commenting features and many more.

Slide 6: Web 2.0 tools: Contributing to change

How do Web 2.0 tools contribute to ‘embracing change’?

Web 2.0 tools allow a web platform to be used for sharing and collaboration.

It is interesting to note that a big difference from Web 1.0 is that Web 2.0 includes much user-generated content (UGC), especially through the use of social media tools.

There is also a convergence in the use of:

  •  Personal applications (for example, fitness, health monitoring, diary apps), to

  •  Social applications (Twitter, Facebook and integrating findings from personal applications within these platforms), to

  •  Educational applications, which may be formal or informal and which can influence, or inform, on personal and social behaviours.

Slide 7: Open Education: What is it?

The second connected thread is that of Open Education.

This was an important consideration to the project because I wanted to create a platform that:

  •  had few, if any barriers, to entry,

  •  was freely and easily accessible across different operating platforms,

  •  was social, informal, disruptive, and

  •  that facilitated digital learning.

Slide 8: Open Education: Why is it important?

So why is open education important?

This short quote captures the essence of the purpose of my idea: to provide a forward thinking learning space.

“If we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s, we rob them of tomorrow”, (Rice, 2013).

Slide 9: Self-determined learning (Heutagogy)

This now leads nicely onto my third and final thread, which is called self-determined learning (or heutagogy).

This approach builds on existing pedagogies but focuses on how tutors can encourage learners to take ownership of their learning. Tutors facilitate but do not manage the learning.

An emphasis of heutagogy is about encouraging learners to be “directly responsible for their own learning as an active rather than passive learner.” (Hase & Kenyon, 2015).

Slide 10: Self-determined learning: In practice

What does this mean in practice and why is it of interest and relevance to this project?

The subject matter of this project is that of an apprentice standard which is learnt within a workplace.

Apprentices (especially in the turfcare industry) are typically remote learners, often being very social media conversant and prolific users of Twitter.

This project offers them a platform to engage and collaborate with others, as well as utilising their digital skills in a way that they can help them determine and control their own learning journey.

In practice though this will typically be outside of, and complementary to, the institutional learning pathway which has been planned by their training provider.

Slide 11: Making connections (1)

This project was created to demonstrate one approach of connecting the three threads of Web 2.0 tools, Open Education and self-determined learning.

It is exploring how adult vocational education can be made more engaging and motivating for some learners, whilst at the same time creating an industry wide open resource which focuses on exploring working practices and understanding in achieving a defined end product, i.e. the apprentice standard.

Slide 12: Making connections (2)

I just wanted to show this slide to illustrate where a platform such as mine can sit within a more traditional approach to digital learning. In essence it can complement or stand-alone from a VLE.

{Note, but not part of the narrative: The CLE can have a structured approach, as in OpenTurf, with defined Learning Outcomes. It is flexible in allowing tutors to experiment with concepts and tools. This can be used as a mechanism for tutors to feedback into a VLE for improvement and further development. It can act as a complement to an institutions VLE, or as a stand-alone platform. If not tutor facilitated then some form of moderation will be required to ensure appropriate language and behaviours are practiced. The CLE is structured to encourage greater learner ownership of their learning journey, moving from self-directed learning (Andragogy) to self-determined learning (Heutagogy)}

Slide 13: OpenTurf: Online platform

What might a Collaborative Learning Environment look like in practice?

I have created this web platform by blending a range of Web 2.0 tools to achieve the intended outcomes identified in slides 3 and 4. The web platform has a comprehensive structure to help illustrate the concept, but little content as of yet.

Determining what features to include was based on the research of Song & Lee, using their Web 2.0 evaluation criteria, which looked at the technological aspects of a site.

They identify 8 evaluation criteria (coded W1 to W8), of which 7 of these are currently demonstrated in the OpenTurf web platform.

Slide 14: OpenTurf: User Generated Content

Criterion W1 is about harnessing the power of the crowd

This is a key feature of Web 2.0, and allows for learner reflection, collaboration and sharing.

The features I have at the moment including commenting facilities, a wiki and a forum. I also have my own blog linked to the platform which illustrates to other learners how they might engage with this type of application.

Criterion W2 is the use of enhanced data management such as tagging systems, which are not currently present.

Slide 15: OpenTurf: Using APIs

Criterion W3 covers the architecture of assembly

This is about providing a feature which remixes or integrates other content.

The platform has integrated an API (Application Programming Interface) from the National Apprenticeship service, which is filtered to select all horticulture industry job vacancies for apprentices in England.

Slide 16: OpenTurf: RSS

Criterion W4 is interested in the distribution of changed content

To help users be informed when content is changed on any page they are interested in, an RSS button is included. Users are therefore actively managing what is fed to them if they subscribe to this feature.

RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication, and is “a standardized system for the distribution of content from an online publisher to Internet users.” (Source: Oxford Dictionary).

Slide 17: OpenTurf: Community building

Criterion W5 looks leveraging the long-tail

Web technology allows for cost-effective delivery of niche products and services.

This subject matter is a relatively niche product, focusing on Sports Turf Apprenticeships

Another technical aspect (criterion W6) identifies that of a platform accommodates evolving content.

Slide 18: OpenTurf: RIA

Criterion W7 looks at the use of Rich Internet Application technologies

Each web page can have many different containers (called divisions), with actions unique to that container, providing a seamless update to just that part of the page.

In this example a basic AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript and XML) powered contact form is illustrated.

Slide 19: OpenTurf: Social features

The final criterion, W8, considers social features and sharing online identities

1. My platform includes some other useful content creation Web 2.0 tools are hidden but can be uncovered when a user clicks the plus sign.

2. Quick links are available on each page for users to access social media accounts, allowing for easy linking to relevant content., which they may like to share.

3. If interesting comments have been made within the OpenTurf platform a user can share this instantly with one of their social media networks (Facebook,, StumbleUpon, Digg, Google+, or Twitter are included).

Slide 20: OpenTurf: Open Education

The blending of the chosen Web 2.0 tools on this platform has created an open learning environment that is:

  •  Social,

  •  Informal, and

  •  Collaborative.

    It is also:

  •  freely accessible,

  •  disruptive in that it challenges paid for and closed platforms, and is

  •  innovative due to the interconnected approach taken.

Slide 21: OpenTurf: Self-determined learning

The interconnected nature of the platform also allows a learner the freedom of choice to engage with and follow their learning journey.

The need to be active and reflective in user generated content all links back to my starting idea and the need to embrace change to develop 21st century skills, with the platform providing increased opportunities for lifelong learning.


Slide 22: Conclusion

To conclude then,

OpenTurf has:

  1. A good blend of interconnected Web 2.0 tools to promote active, collaborative learning,
  2. An accessible, digital, informal platform that reduces barriers to learning and promotes open education, and
  3. A structure which allows a learner the freedom of determining their own learning journey.

What next?

I need to

  •  Add content,

  •  Gather user feedback,                

  •  Promote more widely,

  •  Add more features, and                             

  •  Continually innovate.

    Thank you & Any questions?



Chris Gray
15:41 on 14 February 2016 (Edited 20:09 on 14 February 2016)

Embedded Content

SlideShare host of my powerpoint presentation

SlideShare host of my powerpoint presentation

Accessible Alternative
added by Chris Gray


Wendy Maples
1:36pm 11 January 2016

Hi Chris, Our projects are very similar. The main difference is that while you are looking at integrating set requirements into vocational learners' self-motivated learning environment, I am looking specifically at leisure learning that is not (necessarily) vocational and therefore has no 'given' learning content (apart from learning-how-to-learn/digital literacy). However, I want similarly to use a plastic web-platform and am still deliberating between MOODLE, FB and -- as you seem to have here -- a tailored blogsite. I wonder what led you to decide on this particular software/platform. How did the technical-pedagogical-design issues play out for you in your decision-making?

Nicki Berry
11:56am 16 January 2016

My organisation offers apprenticeships but it is an area that I am only just getting to grips with after a year in post. Unlike our class-based learning, apprentices tend to be spread out in different employment situations and only come together occasionally if they attend functional skills English and maths classes. I wonder whether the platform you are developing could be used to engage apprentices as part of a group, like distance learners, and help them to collaborate more effectively. 

What is your intention for Open Turf? Will you use it just in your own setting or open it up to a wider audience? If you make it widely available, will you charge a fee or have it as a free resource?

John Baglow
7:08pm 16 January 2016

Chris, I wonder if you could explain what you mean by 'self-determined learning"? Do you mean learning on something like a MOOC where there is probably no tutor or is it another way of referring to students taking responsibility for their own learning? I certainly like the idea of a collaborative learning environment - my project has 'collaborative' in its title  and tries to suggest that collaborative learning, or peer learning as I have recently seen it described, lies at the heart of effective learning.

How would Open Turf differ from the H818 set-up? Would it be a combination of Open Studio and the forums and OU Live? Would you say that we are using an 'online immersive platform'?

Anita Houghton
10:23am 17 January 2016

Hi Chris

I’m too very interested in the self-determined angle.   Do you see candidates uploading videos etc of themselves demonstrating how to perform functions?   Will the learning platform be different then the assessment tool for the standards?    Will there be overlap? 

Is there a danger that people may not collaborate as they are scared to give away trade secrets?


Elaine Dalloway
12:09pm 17 January 2016

Hi Chris

I'm looking forward to seeing which collaborative tools you have incorporated into your project artefact.  Will this be asynchronious are synchronous (or both)?


Dr Carol Waites
5:28pm 17 January 2016

I love the use of padlet for your poster!  I intend to try to use it as part of my presentation, but haven't yet worked out if it will work. 

I am still struggling to find detail of what you intend to offer.  I think you are offering employees the chance to update their professional qualifications but it seems to be more ambitious than that and also have professional development in general?  Will it have the potential to be a MOOC style of thing open to those outside your field (as it were!). 

Sarah J Sneddon
2:37pm 19 January 2016

Hi Chris,

May I 'follow' you?  (I believe we are supposed to ask...)

Your project is light miles away from mine but I've felt a connection with it since the beginning.  A good friend of mine is a greenkeeper at one of our famous Fife golf courses so I have have been able to 'personalise' it from the start.  I can visualise him using your resource...

Looking forward to your presentation.




Chris Gray
10:57pm 19 January 2016

I thought it might be helpful to provide some feedback on these comments to date (19th January), so I've created a short blog providing some feedback so far

Sarah J Sneddon
2:17pm 25 January 2016

Hi Chris,

I've just been to your blog and had a read through your very comprehensive replies to the comments above.  I'm not partiucarly computer savvy so can I just check that I've fully understood what you are doing?

You are creating a platform with a specific audience (groundkeepers, in the first instance) in mind.  The platform is designed to facilitate CPD among your specific group.  It aims to provide what I see as an almost giant common room for your industry which will offer the tools that will let people continue to learn (and share good practice).  You have populated your platform with the new Level 2 apprenticeship material but while this is useful, it is only an example of the different materials that could go into it.

Am I OK, so far?  It seems a very ambitious and exciting plan.  How are you planning to create the community in the first instance?  Obviously, your choice of 'tools' will be aimed at your market but how will you get them to 'log in' for the first time?  Is there a carrot (or a stick!)?



Chris Gray
4:04pm 30 January 2016 (Edited 11:46am 12 February 2016)


Thanks for your comments. I think you summarise it very well. My aim would be to 'seed' the platform with selected content to illustrate the concept further, then promote it directly to the main target audience (via social media in particular); viewing the content will not require a login, however, commenting and adding content (i.e. UGC - user generated content) will, although this is only to ensure non-abusive or inappropriate comments etc are made.

Once the required assessment plan is published for this apprentice standard then more relevant content, sign posting and comments can be made. The aim was to create the structure in which the detail can be populated.

The carrot is essentially to aid individuals in learning and benefiting their own career, employability and interest and to encourage wider sharing of good practice and information within the industry in an impartial and objective way without being seen to be attached to any partciular organisation where platforms might be considered as being in conflict with providing unbiased information.

Ultimately this example would form just one element within a larger site covering different interests, so for example, a totally different area could be replicated to deal with gardening, or school revision subjects, or whatever.

The only stick is that I think it is reasonable that people should login to publically comment; why should people nowadays hide behind anonymity if they are open and we are encouraging openness?

Hope this helps.

Dr Simon Ball
6:14pm 17 February 2016

Hi Chris

Here is a summary of the questions/comments from your presentation - please respond as you wish:

  • To what extent do our apprenticeship programmes really prepare students for working in a digital age?
  • If students are taught better right from school, self directed learning can work. Our adults are too tied to the apron strings of teachers
    I spend a lot of my time teaching them to be autonomous
  • can you say more about the content that students are collaborating on? Are there specific e.g.s of prjects/topics, etc?
  • Which platform did you use? Did I miss it?
  • Have you tested it out with some guinea pigs?
  • Do you have to monitor it?
  • One of the issues with OU online content is that it is often (less in IET) additional to other learning -- so it adds to a student's workload. We ask: what are we going to leave out? Is this an issue for your learners and this innovation?
  • Like the OpenTurf website/blog. Are you using analytics to see how porous it is (borrowing Helen B's term). You can see where people came from using Google analytics.

Chris Gray
4:53pm 20 February 2016 (Edited 4:54pm 20 February 2016)

Here's my replies, which I hope are helpful, to the comments (many thanks for these as well):

  • To what extent do our apprenticeship programmes really prepare students for working in a digital age?

In practice I am sure this will vary significantly. If we consider that the 'digital age' requires 21st century skills, which are: critical thinking, problem solving, meaning making, communication, collaboration, and decision making, (Rahimi et al, 2015) then there is potentially much which can help prepare apprentices for the digital age. These skills are an integral part of apprenticeships, however, the extent and depth of them will vary from a Level 2 to Level 4 apprenticeship. I think the biggest challenge has been the perceived, and actual in many cases, low quality of the current apprenticeship framework ('Apprenticeships drive has diluted quality, says Ofsted chief',

The Government desire to improve the approach to apprenticeships ( by putting employers in the driving seat to design new apprentice standards that meet the needs of industry is, I consider, a very positive initiative which will also benefit good quality training providers and will filter out low quality providers which have blighted education and training for many years. This outcome should certainly see apprenticeship programmes even better prepare learners for the 21st Century.


  • If students are taught better right from school, self directed learning can work. Our adults are too tied to the apron strings of teachers. I spend a lot of my time teaching them to be autonomous.

I consider that giving students, especially young adults / adults, more ownership of the learning process then they will become more engaged and enthused over learning, thus reducing the reliance on tutors, and increasing the quality of time and feedback tutors can give to students (although this will depend on whetehr senior management sees it that way as well!). This won't be applicable to all learners, but a large enough 'slice' to make an impact.

  • can you say more about the content that students are collaborating on? Are there specific e.g.s of projects/topics, etc?

At the moment the structure of the platform is being developed, with the requirements of the new apprentice standard being clearly identified as part of the structure. Once this has been more fully populated with user guides and sample content then learners, either in an informal, or more formal way (considering this is an open platform then it will be able to be utilised in numerous ways) would then be able to add content as they see fit, although the focus would be to do with the relevant apprentice standard. However, future enhancements could readily see a wide range of subject matters included and connections made between them as well.

  • Which platform did you use? Did I miss it?

It is a web platform (HTML 5; CSS3; MySql 5.5/7) coded from scratch and hosted on "1 and 1", whicc is a paid for host, but I find them very helpful and with good coverage, - although there are many hosts that can be considered.                                                           

  • Have you tested it out with some guinea pigs?

Once the structure is complete and guides and sample content added then it will be ready for user feedback, so not at the moment, as I want to make it as immersive as possible to start with, so it is a true reflection of what the full blown platform would be like.

  • Do you have to monitor it?

Yes. Initially the forum was open without registration being required, but I have changed it to having to register before being able to add to the forum, as even in trial stage inappropriate comments had been made, although they were more to do with suggestions for going to certain sites rather than the use of inappropriate language. I don't think this was a big issue, but I just wanted a contrast with the commenting feature which is totally open in that approval isn't needed beforehand before posting (although word filters can be applied to automatically remove inappropriate words from being used).

The commenting features are against the apprentice requirements (see the IPM requirement as an example for now) can be commented without prior registration an approval, but this does need to be monitored actively, otherwise a similar registration procedure would need to be triggered.

  • One of the issues with OU online content is that it is often (less in IET) additional to other learning -- so it adds to a student's workload. We ask: what are we going to leave out? Is this an issue for your learners and this innovation?

The emphasis is for an open platform which would develop organically by users (and facilitated by tutors where a formal approach is taken for some learners) and would sit outside of an institutional learning environment (although as mentioned in my presentation, this could be used as complement to an institutional one for experimentation and for feedback into improvements in the institutional one). I see this platform as being more of one in which users would engage with to provide a contrast with an institutional one, as it is structured for an informal approach to learning, and more for exploring and posting to when already online with their social media networks. In essence then, I don't see this as impacting on a student's workload.

  • Like the OpenTurf website/blog. Are you using analytics to see how porous it is (borrowing Helen B's term). You can see where people came from using Google analytics.

Yes, the dashboard provided by the host (1 and 1) is very detailed and provides a wide range of analytics.

Dr Susan Morris
2:18pm 24 February 2016 (Edited 2:21pm 24 February 2016)

Quality of explanation of the subject matter

I have admired your clarity of purpose about getting the OpenTurf in action from day 1 of the H818.  You are focused and clear in how you explain your subject matter. The position of the resource in your work was clearly presented in the conference. 

Utility of materials designed

The presentation was straightforward in its walk through of the design process and execution of the resource.  Your contributions to OpenStudio have been prolific and your presentation was mindful of this fact for your audience experience.  The presentation has a freshness

Quality of technological interactivity

Your presentation was static and this was beneficial.  The interactivity of the resource is purposeful to the learning and the pitch for your intended audience. 

You are meeting a gap that you have identified that needs to be addressed.

Opportunities for deeper learning

I am interested in how the commuities of practice around OpenTurf will develop in response to the new resource. While you can speculate how this will develop, how the learners will own, feedback and coproduce the next iteration of OpenTurf will be interesting.  

OpenTurf is on the threshold of Web 3.0 with the interactivity of social media/word of digital mouth of your learners.  

Assurance of accessibility

The presentation was fully accessible. I was pleased in other way that the mind map was omitted from the presentation and pleased that you capturing all your thoughts in that way in the early planning stage of OpenTurf.

Finally, I am delighted to read in your comments above a transformation from private to openness. I remember our early discussions on the Tutor Group Forum about what is open and what it can offer.  

Keep in touch @ChrisGray1066


Chris Gray
7:42pm 25 February 2016


Many thanks for your comments - really helpful and appreciated.


Contribute to the discussion

Please log in to post a comment. Register here if you haven't signed up yet.