sugar evaluation blogs

I'm evaluating Sugar on a Stick (SoaS) with my year 10 control tech class in semester two.

I've created a separate blog for this:
http://xo-whs2009.blogspot.com/.

Go there if you want more detail. Student blogs are linked through the sidebar. It would be nice for students to get comments, if you feel like encouraging them. Most of them haven't written blogs before so they receive a pleasant surprise if something drops in and leaves an encouraging or thoughtful comment.

My blog might also be a useful guide in some respects for other teachers wanting to test out sugar on a stick.

patching turtle art

Walter Bender is attempting to bridge the gap between teachers and developers:

Sugar Digest 2008-09-22 (September archive IAEP):

Some teachers in Uruguay are teaching the Pythagorean Theorem and were stymied by the lack of a square root function in Turtle Art. They wanted to demonstrate that the length of the diagonal of a square is equal to the square root of the sum of the square of each side. In pseudocode, they wanted to build the following construct:

repeat 4 (forward 100 right 90)
right 45
forward sqrt ((100*100) + (100*100))

Lots of alternatives were discussed, including using Dr. Geo. My favorite comment was from Pato Acevedo, who said:
[Modo Irónico on]
Claro, no puedo entender como fue que Pitagoras "descubrió" su famoso Teorema si en su epoca no existian calculadoras
[Modo Irónico Off]

Google translate:
[Ironic mode on]
Sure, I cannot understand how that was Pythagoras discovered his famous Theorem in his time if there were no calculators
[Ironic Mode Off]

But eventually—albeit with some intervention on my part—the discussion turned towards how to modify the Turtle Art activity. I put together a tutorial with the hope that not only would I be satisfying the immediate needs of the teachers, but also, showing them that in fact they could, themselves, make the necessary changes to the program to meet their needs. I am hoping that I didn't make it too easy for them and that some of them will risk making changes—creating new instruments ... A dialog between teachers and developers has begun. The next step is for some of the teachers to become developers.

I left this comment on the IAEP (Its an education project) list:
The idea of building a bridge for that small percentage (I agree with rob's figures) who want to be developers is a good one

insert: Rob Costello's figures were: (<1%) of teachers who would have the technical confidence/background/interest to learn /apply this (and maybe 0.01 % would already possess the skills)

I've asked a friend over to talk me through Patching_Turtle_Art. I'm lucky to have such a friend, otherwise I would have to ask dumb questions in public, which is not good for teacher ego since teachers are meant to know things already :-) I would identify fear of looking dumb as a major obstacle to these bridging explorations.

Some educators have written about what it means to join a community - what does it actually mean to be a scientist, a basketball professional or a software developer? eg. James Gee wrote a book (What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy) about how computer games could be used in this way. He identifies these elements of joining what he calls a semiotic domain:

1. we learn to experience the world in a new way: see, feel and operate on
2. we gain the potential to join a new social group, a new club
3. we gain the resources that prepare us for future learning and problem solving in a new domain and perhaps related domains

He's trying to draw a distinction between simple knowledge and being part of a community of knowledge, the latter being the real deal

When I read through walter's account, already knowing a little bit (but not a great deal) about programming, python, logo, turtle art, visual programming I still have really basic questions to ask - things that are so transparent to developers that it may not occur to even think of them as questions or problems that have to be overcome before being engaged in this activity:

• Where do you find things (python files, source code)
• Which things do what? How does walter know which python files have to be tweaked?
• Who do you communicate with? (I didn't know that Brian Silverman was the maintainer and didn't know his email)
• How do you program more advanced stuff in python, eg. using lambda?
• What is FOSS etiquette, how do you go about learning to be a member of this community?

Due to the reality of being a teacher (lack of time, large classes, the need to keep kids busy on task, schools and communities dominated by propriety software) all of the above is problematic - but as rob says a small % of teachers and a bigger percentage of students are open to it.

Sugar Labs

This is a comment I posted to the Its an Education Project (IAEP) list (September archive) in response to some members of Sugar Labs being sad about the first Windows XP OLPC pilot.

As a teacher in an industrialised country I'd see Sugar combined with low cost laptops as a vehicle for:

• immersion - computers are always available not limited exposure in labs - this makes an incredible difference to learning with computers, as Papert and others have argued
• wide variety and growing of educational software packages (10,000 visits per day to Activities page from Uruguay)
• constructionist software such as etoys, scratch, turtle art, drgeo etc.
• python is a great first language, after the visual programming approaches have been tried
• collaborative aspect is cutting edge, offers new ways of doing things (but not yet working out of the box, unfortunately)
• linux experience - in the last year or so I am coming across a few students who have taught themselves linux at home - this is a new and slowly growing trend
• FOSS philosophy of collaborative development fits readily with what good teachers do (cf. hiding your expertise in order to maximise your profit)

What other group, apart from Sugar Labs, offers this potential? Sugar Labs also offers this list as a discussion forum about these issues. Who else provides this?

These things are not obvious to most teachers (for various reasons) but at least some of these things are obvious to a small but growing minority. If Sugar works well out of the box I think there would be small but significant and growing uptake.

Another view (less optimistic) is to look at the history of computing since the 1960s and to realise that most of the important discoveries were made then and since commercial interests got a hold on it the true potential has been largely lost or very much obscured. eg. late binding provides a far superior environment to teach about variables but the dominant systems don't offer that option.

More detail about this vision: http://learningevolves.wikispaces.com/alanKay+talk

MS has a long way to fall but strategically they have peaked are in decline. No need to be too alarmed by the thrashing around of a smelly dinosaur in a tarpit. Other commercial companies, such as Google, will eventually take their place. How does that sit with the Sugar Labs vision? Not sure.

I'd see the issue as a practical one of getting the software to work properly. In terms of vision, strategy and future potential we hold the good cards.

Sugar evaluation wiki

I have created a wiki, http://xo-whs.wikispaces.com/, where some of the year 10 students at my school are evaluating Sugar activities. I'm interested in feedback: billkerr (at) gmail (dot) com, if you don't want to leave a comment here.

I'm using it to record my own exploration of the activities. At the moment we are looking at Turtle Art and Dr Geo II. Learning a lot and it's interesting. I'm very happy that I've finally worked out a way to play with the Sugar activities in a collaborative context.

Working with Sugar provides a great context for new learning. Many of us have been trapped against our wishes in MS Windows dominated school environments for years. Given that teachers are always very busy there has been little incentive to learn linux, for example, when it is not used in your work environment. I remember I tried years ago but gave up due to workload pressure. Two of my year 10 students know more linux terminal commands than I do so I'm now under pressure to keep up with them. It's great!

One of my year 10 students has built a jabber server, which we can use locally to enable the collaborative features of Sugar.

Due to a bug in the software the collaboration features have not been working so far (without the jabber server) on our particular network, although it is reported to "just work" on Ubuntu networks. With Joel's help this has been reported to the IAEP list and hopefully will be fixed in the near future

Sugar labs is the main home of sugar and seems to be powering along at the moment.

new XO Live CD 080812

There is a new version of the XO Live CD out, the developmental joyride version, which may be downloaded from:
ftp://www.rohrmoser-engineering.de/pub/XO-LiveCD/XO-LiveCD_080812.iso

Wolfgang Rohrmoser writes:

Since OLPC joyride releases begin to stabilize after the transition to Fedora 9 and the SUGAR developper team has done a lot of reorganization work, a new release of the XO-LiveCD is available

This release is based on a recent joyride build 2282 and demonstrates many new SUGAR features. Activities have been added and updated to recent versions

I have found these new activities on this release, making it well worth the download:

X2o: A puzzle solving and critical thinking game similar to the Incredible Machine; make crazy contraptions to get the O back on top of the X
video chat: Video/voice chat
org.laptop.StopWatchActivitystop watch: Sharable stopwatch activity
vu.lux.olpc.Pacmanpacman: A Pacman clone
develop: Development IDE/tool
gcompris: educational games
tux paint: Paint program for young children; stamps included, localized to 70 languages, stereo sound
guido van robot: Educational programming language, IDE and lessons; Stable with 18 lessons included
simcity: Construct and maintain your own city
xo-get: A GUI for installing and removing activities

For a list and description of all the activities, go to http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities

evaluating Sugar in the developed world

How teachers in the developed world can run the Sugar software and activities in our computer labs which run only Windows!!

Problem: Shortage of OLPC machines in the developed world, ie. you need to be able to play with it, immerse yourself in it in order to be able to evaluate it. That's how computer learning works.

Educational objective: I will get my year 10 IT class to systematically evaluate the Sugar software and activities

Summary: Make a bootable USB key of the XO-LiveCD image and setup the BIOS on each computer to boot off the USB key

Details:

1. Download the bleeding edge joyride version of the XO-LiveCD, currently XO-LiveCD_080607.iso
2. Burn an image CD
3. (It's not practical for me to use the CDs at school since the CD drives have not been enabled due to student vandalism in the past)
4. download unetbootin-windows-241.exe from http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/
5. format your usb drive under windows (or delete all the files of it if already in windows format)
6. run the downloaded file unetbootin-windows-241.exe
7. it should find your usb drive
8. click on the diskimage radiobutton
9. browse to your XO -live CD iso (must have it in iso format - cant use a burnt cd)
10. click on OK
11. wait till files are copied (it takes a while)
12. go into BIOS and setup to boot of USB-HDD key
13. reboot off USB Drive

Update:(7th August)
With the above there is a problem that the USB key does not boot into the introductory menu seen on the bootable CD, which enables you to select the bleeding edge joyride version and choose your language. It boots into the default German language standard version of Sugar.

To fix this problem:

1. Open the syslinux.cfg file (on the USB key) in notepad or some other editor
2. Change lb_country=6 to lb_country=1 (German to English)
3. Change lb_config=update.1 to lb_config=joyride
4. Change lb_system=build-708 to lb_system=joyride-2024
5. Save and reboot
   

A one gig usb drive is the minimum requirement because the joyride CD is 700 mb

Update (30th August):
Don't use cheap LASER USB keys, they are unreliable (failure rate 1 in 3) and slow. Kingston USB keys are far more reliable and about 5 times faster in transferring data to them.

Thanks to tony, joel and paul for help with this

control through scarcity

Christoph Derndorfer:

OLPC Boston (and close associates, like Brightstar) appear to have all the power. All that power is in one single nerve pressure point which is very easy to control: the availability of XOs
- The Lost Tribe of OLPC, Continued ...

On the surface initially making OLPCs only available to children in disadvantaged countries seems admirable and egalitarian. One of the side effects was that it made it difficult for someone like me, a supporter in the industrialised world with mainly educational knowledge (not a python hacker), to get involved. OLPCs are still quite rare in Australia.

Until Christoph's post I hadn't seen this clearly as a means of controlling potential supporters. But in any organisation control is exerted through the way in which things of value are distributed. Be it information, hardware or something else.

I used to be a member of a communist party which had a very top down, unelected, hierarchical leadership and which encouraged its members to go into the workplace or to be activists, to look outwards to the needs of "the masses" but not to look inwards at the quality of the leadership. There are lots of ways in which "leaders" can pretend to be doing great work for the people while at the same time shoring up their position as important leaders. It boils down to a division of labour where an elite group does the important ideological, thinking work while the rank and file members are expected to be workers, activists etc. ie. it's just a reproduction of the boss-worker relationship which the "communist party" was meant to be overthrowing. Easy enough to see how this could be translated into the OLPC community - hard working software developers who aren't all that interested in the politics of it all, in the first place. It can be hard to sort out and devastating when you finally figure out you've been led down the garden path.

I mentioned earlier, Ursula LeGuin's, The Dispossessed , where she describes perfectly how groups founded on equality and continually proclaiming equality can generate incredibly sophisticated and devious methods of power seeking

btw I like the open and above board style in which Walter Bender appears to manage the Sugar project (without knowing a great deal about it but my first impressions are positive)

confessions of a fundamentalist

confessions of a fundamentalist, part one (OLPC news)
confessions of a fundamentalist, part two (OLPC news)
Berkman lunch, Walter Bender, Sugar labs by David Weinberger (some interesting parts there from the talk that are not included in the OLPC news article)

Walter Bender's talk is a good expose about getting the philosophical balance right between free software and learning in the here and now, that kids learning is the end goal and free software can be much more the means than it has been up to now in a Proprietary dominated world.

But in the rhetorical flourish of using Nicholas Negroponte's provocative words to obtain a catchy title for his talk I think Walter falls into a trap. Walter says free and open source (FOSS) is not fundamental but learning is. He then goes onto associate learning with constructionism (no other theory is mentioned) and so it begins to sound like constructionism is the fundamental "correct" learning theory.

Philosophically, we need to reject all fundamentalism. Physicists are still looking for new fundamental particles.

Learning theory is a mess. I have long argued that there is no unified learning theory and it is best to cherry pick.
There is no unified learning theory
from never mind, to structured mind, to messy mind
learning theory evolves (wiki)

This page of the wiki outlines some of the many learning theories (incomplete). Constructionism, as explained by Papert, is a great learning theory but certainly not the only one worth examining.

XO-LiveCD

Following the instructions on Tony Forster's blog (sharing with sugar) I downloaded the XO-LiveCD-080321.iso image, burnt an image CD and booted the latest OLPC software on my PC. Thanks Tony.

This partially solves the problem of the difficulty of educators in the developed world investigating the potential of the OLPC software and Sugar

I was pleasantly surprised to see how many different activities are now available, ranging from Paint, Write, Chat, music composition, multiple programming environments (Scratch is now on) and lots of games. I counted 41 different Activities.

I plan to take a couple of the Live CD's to school and see if we can setup Sugar collaboration there, as Tony has done on his home network (connecting a networked PC to his OLPC machine)

Sugary collaboration (joel stanley, tom hoffman)

I didn't grok the ability of Sugar to transfer collaboration to other hardware. Joel Stanley explains how much of the collaborative functionality built into the OLPC can be transferred via Sugar to other hardware provided you have a network of some type (from a recent email chat). This increases the lure of schools purchasing trollies of cheap laptops such as the EEE ("ultramobile" PCs). Thanks also to walter for leaving a similar comment about part of this on my earlier blog post.

Question: Alternative scenarios (to having OLPCs) might include the plethora of cheap laptops now coming on stream, initiated by the EEE -- but without mesh network and sugar etc it's going to be a very different experience, isn't it?

Joel: No.

Sugar =! XO. And Sugar is where the collaboration occurs. Your platform can be any computer, as Sugar will run on any computer.

What you think of as the "mesh" is really a software layer in Sugar that enables connection between to computers, and is quite distinct from the 802.11s meshing wireless technology.

Sugar's collaboration software layer can run atop any network layer - a wired network, current wireless (802.11b/g) or up and coming tech (802.11s "mesh" wireless). The collaboration experience does not degrade by using traditional tech; infact, it improves due to increased reliability over mesh - a technology which is still and evolving and is yet to mature.

Note that students who use XO's in classroom or school wide deployments will not use the mesh wireless at school - it doesn't scale beyond 20ish machines (yet - this is a work in progress, the number goes up as the software develops).

(Don't let this detract from the awesome technological feat that is the 802.11s mesh - it enables groups of up to 20 students to turn on their laptops while sitting under a tree, or in an random classroom, to form a network without any other infrastructure. This is a handy piece of tech, but it is not essential to the Sugar experience.)

Question: Do you know on what platforms sugar currently runs?

Joel: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Supported_systems provides an overview.

To summarise: current versions of the major Linux distros can run Sugar as it's desktop. Ubuntu 8.04, Fedora 8, Debian Unstable.

Ubuntu 8.04 provides a version of sugar that is close to - but not exactly the same as - the Update.1 or build-703 images for the XO.

Debian has more up to date packages in "unstable", which isn't a released distribution of Linux, but is more than stable for our purposes.

Question: So my school can buy a trolley of EEE laptops for my class, run ubuntu / sugar and sit out under the tree and chat? There's gotta be a catch

Joel: The 'sit under a tree' model is how we describe the XO's when operating without a wireless access point. This uses the unique mesh technology.

As it stands, your school can buy a trolley of laptops, and run Sugar on Linux with all the collaboration enabled, /iff/ they can connect to a wireless access point.

Some terms that will help us have this discussion:

mesh - a low level wireless networking protocol that enables laptops to form a network without the assistance of an Access Point. Enabling the 'under a tree' model. Unique to the XO (at this point).

collaboration - a fundamental part of Sugar that enables multiple users to share activities. Runs on top of /any/ network - wireless LAN, wired LAN, internet, etc., and therefore any hardware platform.

Tom Hoffman explained the broader educational implications of this in April:

As I see it, Sugar is a set of tools for writing creative and collaborative activities for children. I think a lot of the confusion about, say, "porting" Sugar for Windows mis-places the reader's emphasis on Sugar as a window manager, rather than Sugar's potential advantages for the activities (née applications) which are built on it. Put another way, what's most important about Sugar is not what I see and do up to the point I launch an activity, it is how the activity works.

As an English teacher, here's what grabbed me about Sugar: it was designed to make it as easy to pass a copy of a student's work across the room electronically as it is to carry a piece of paper across the room. A close second in importance is automatic saves that don't use a hierarchical file system. Not using a hierarchy isn't such a big deal in high school, but if you've ever sat in the back of a room full of third graders while their teacher tries to make sure they've all saved their PowerPoints to the right folder in a networked drive, you'll understand the value (although the computer teachers tend to have internalized the idea that that teaching 9 year olds to use tools ill-suited to their needs is part of their job) ...

As a teacher, if one kid fires up an OLPC running the full Sugar shell and clicks on the Write icon in the frame, and another kid double clicks on a icon on his desktop or selects Write from his Start menu, I don't care as long as they can easily collaborate. I don't really care if on Windows Write opens as a regular window, with a separate window for the neighborhood view. I can deal with that. I don't care if my Windows desktop running Write has any concept of mesh networking, because it is plugged into an ethernet jack anyhow. I just want my kids to be able to have writing circles with the least technical hurdles possible....

From where I sit, there has been a distinct lack of interest in Sugar from the "learning sciences" and other communities that are involved in research and development around software for kids. They have not seen Sugar for what it is, which is the one chance in this generation,and I'm talking human generations here, not technological ones, to create a common set of open source tools specifically for writing applications for kids. They don't seem to get that this is a singular opportunity to invest in the foundation of their discipline. I don't understand why, but one hope I hold out for Walter's software spin-off is that he can engage this community. However, I only see that happening if Sugar is not limited to OLPC or Linux. Also, it is certainly true that as long as Sugar is a subset of OLPC, OLPC doesn't have a strong motivation to dedicate resources to non-OLPC platforms. Sugar needs an home outside of OLPC that can look at the software in a broader context.

untangling Free, Sugar and Constructionism (walter bender)

Walter Bender Discusses Sugar Labs Foundation

I agree with the way that Walter Bender talks about Free, Sugar and Constructionism as though they are different things which can be brought together synergistically to enhance the overall learning impact. I think it's important not to mix up these words in a fuzzy jumble, to be able to speak clearly about the different aspects of something you support, the OLPC, [no, not necessarily the OLPC but whatever material construct that Free, Sugar and Constructionism becomes embodied in]

Also, in an imperfect world where you can't achieve everything at once it's important to try to tease out the relative impact of each piece of the mix. If we can't obtain OLPCs for Australian schools, for instance, then it still might be possible to do something along similar lines if we understand the issues deeply.

Free:

We should provide tools that skew the odds towards appropriation, without being proscriptive. For example, you could give a child a book as a PDF file or in a Wiki format. In both cases, the child can read the book. But the choice of representation does make a difference: the chances that the child will add a comment to a PDF file, which is read-only, are much less than to a Wiki page, which has built-in affordances for annotation.

Bringing the concepts together, the culture that is embodied in the FOSS movement — a meritocracy that is built upon both collaboration and critique — is synergistic with some core principles of learning, so, where possible, I try to embrace that culture. (The guidelines when I was still at OLPC were to choose FOSS tools over proprietary tools when there was not a significant difference in terms of the impact on learning.)

So, for Walter learning is more important than FOSS but if the software is roughly equivalent then choose FOSS. I agree.

Sugar:

Sugar revisits how computers can be used for education: it explicitly promotes sharing and collaborative learning. At its core is the concept of an “Activity”. Activities are software applications such as a web browser, a word processor, or even a calculator, that, when “Sugarized”, are enhanced by three key features:
(1) the application is readily shared with others; for example, to share what you are reading with others requires just one “button click”; in the word processor, Sugar provides the ability to do peer-to-peer editing, again with just one click; a chat window is always available for seeking help, sharing ideas, or exchanging data;
(2) a journal entry is created every time an application is run; not only are files and data automatically saved, but a diary is created so that a child, his/her teacher, and parents can monitor progress; and
(3) applications run full-screen in a simplified framework, yet there is no upper bound on the complexity that can be reached; for example, TamTam, a music Activity that is bundled with Sugar, enables a child to progress from playing a single instrument to layering multiple instruments and rhythms to playing music in synchrony with other children to composing music to designing new instruments to programming music.

I would summarise this three points of what it means to be “Sugarized” as:
(1) Shareable with one click, ease of sharing, conversation and community
(2) All edits can be tracked through the journal (it's invaluable for a teacher to know which students are editing since many students don't edit)
(3) low entry, high ceiling

I think this clarifies what Sugar is, not just a new User Interface, with different features than Windows, but also a way of doing things that is built into the Activities (which replace Applications). Others have acknowledged the confusion of identifying clearly what Sugar is. In the Power of Sugar Christoph Derndorfer pins Sugar down as a "gravitational force" ie. there is a cloud of different concepts floating around in idea space and Sugar is a unifying concept that picks out some concepts and brings them together, including:

information storage and retrieval (Journal) and the fact that collaboration is a “first order experience”

Constructionism:

“Constructionism” is a theory of learning pioneered by Seymour Papert. Papert first started developing the theory as a student of Piaget in the early 1960s. Over the course of more than 40 years of research and practice, Papert and his students found that children learn best when they are in the “active role of the designer and constructor” and that this happens best in a context where the child is “consciously engaged in constructing a public entity” — something “truly meaningful” for the learner. Further, the creation process and the end product must be shared with others in order for the full effects to take root.

I think this part is correct as far as it goes but it does leave out creating the meta-learning environment, which does require a lot of work by the teacher

Affordances:

I notice also that Walter uses the word affordances a couple of times and I think that is just the right word to use, because affordances means the opportunity is there but not the inevitability (eg. bad teaching can destroy the best intentions of those who designed the machine):

Sugar provides simple and readily available affordances for learners engaging in construction and sharing the process and end products with others ...

Sugar is at present unique in the way in which it provides affordances for collaboration for all applications ...

Scope:

... some are writing software to improve Sugar; some are porting Sugar to new platforms; some are developing new activities that run in Sugar; some are helping to debug Sugar and help with quality assurance; some are writing documentation for Sugar developers and for those who use Sugar in the field; some are developing new scenarios for learning with Sugar; some are using Sugar and reporting upon their experiences to the community; and some are providing help and support

What a great list of possibilities! So, there is some scope here for educators as well as python developers - ideas for new activities to run on Sugar and developing new scenarios for learning with Sugar.

One question though: With OLPCs only being distributed to the developing world and with limited options for educators in industrialised countries to obtain at least two OLPCs (at least two are necessary for collaborative activities), then how do interested educators acquire the basic material substrate to become actively involved in these activities and scenarios? There needs to be a way for educators in developed countries to obtain OLPCs. We are currently stuck in our wealthy countries doing thought experiments for the impoverished. (the Give one - Get one scheme was limited to the USA / Canada, had a limited time frame and from some reports the distribution was inefficient or worse)

community user interface

Everything changes.

So it's not logical that the human computer user interface (UI) will always be based on a desktop metaphor of windows, icons, menus and pointers (WIMP). Something better will come along.

Maybe something better has come along. Sugar UI, as featured on the OLPC

In Sugar the focus is on a community UI, rather than a desktop UI. This makes a lot of sense because the wirless mesh network is a central feature of the OLPC:

• Neighbourhood replaces Desktop
• Frame replaces Menubar

and there are other changes:

• Journal replaces a hierarchical file system
• Activities replace applications
• Objects replace files

Follow this link for a complete description of the OLPC Human Interface Guidelines

Some related links:
The Sugar UI
The Sugar UI featured in the OLPC appears to finally break from the well worn conventions of Windows and MacOS

File Systems Aren't a Feature
Why the file system should be completely eliminated

Video of the OLPC UI

Nooface
The purpose of this site is to support the exchange of ideas about next-generation user interfaces, focusing on approaches that go beyond the Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointing Device (WIMP) method on which most current user interfaces are based

Jensen Harris
This blog is all about the new user interface we've been working on for Office 2007. This new version does away with menus and toolbars and replaces them with new paradigms such as the Ribbon, Contextual Tabs, and Galleries (MS insider view)