Texas Tech University
Raiders Engaged
Institutional Summary of
Academic Outreach and Engagement
Academic Year 2015 Administration
Report Date: April 25, 2016
Background
Raiders Engaged is an in-house instrument administered annually by Texas Tech University
(TTU) as the primary method for assessing its academic outreach and engagement activities. This
report summarizes the results from the Academic Year 2015 administration of Raiders Engaged.
Data encompasses outreach and engagement projects, which took place between September 1,
2014 and August 31, 2015, as reported by faculty and staff from academic and administrative
units at TTU in response to the online survey.
The 2015 Raiders Engaged online survey opened on November 2, 2015 accompanied by an
e-mail from Provost Schovanec inviting TTU faculty and staff to participate in reporting any
outreach and engagement projects conducted over the past academic year (see Appendix I.)
Several e-mail reminders followed, and units were also contacted individually to encourage
participation. The survey officially closed on December 1, 2015 but remained active for input to
allow some units that were individually contacted after the deadline to report.
A total of 2,114 faculty and administrative staff were invited to provide information
regarding any outreach and engagement activities that they were involved in during Academic Year
2015. Overall, 472 entries were submitted via Raiders Engaged, at a response rate of 22.3%. An
institutional summary report reflecting TTU’s overall results is included in Appendix II.
Results
Respondents reported on a total of 546 unique projects, 117 of which were new. Based on
data submitted, 61,906 total faculty hours and 266,767 total staff hours were spent preparing,
implementing, and evaluating these projects. TTU projects involved a total of 503 external and 427
internal partnerships. The following table provides a summary of project data reported by
administrative units, colleges, and schools.
Project Summary
Unique Projects
546
New Projects
117
Unique Faculty Hours
Unique Staff Hours
61,906
266,767
External Partnerships
503
Internal Partnerships
427
Projects by Reporting Unit
Unit
Administrative Units
257
College of Agricultural Sciences & Natural Resources
18
College of Architecture
15
College of Arts and Sciences
56
Rawls College of Business
17
College of Education
50
College of Engineering
12
Honors College
3
College of Human Sciences
62
School of Law
12
College of Media & Communication
4
College of Visual & Performing Arts
40
TOTAL
546
Initiative Type
The following reflects projects by Initiative Type. Projects considered Individual Initiative
are those that were not dependent on any support from a program, department, or the university
beyond base salary. Institutional Initiatives include projects that were sponsored or supported by a
department, program, or the university. Multi-Institutional Initiatives are those initiatives led by
multiple institutions. The majority of projects were conducted as Individual Initiatives (48%)
followed by Institutional Initiatives (32%).
Geographic Impact
The following section highlights the geographic areas that were impacted by institutionwide outreach and engagement projects. In terms of the state-wide impact of TTU’s outreach and
engagement efforts, 218 projects reported serving Lubbock County, followed by Dallas County
(21) and Hale County (18). A full list of Texas counties served is provided in Appendix III.
A total of 361 projects indicated impacting the entire state of Texas. Oklahoma and New
Mexico were the second most-impacted states (10), followed by Arkansas (7). A full list of states
served is provided in Appendix IV.
In terms of the global impact of TTU’s outreach and engagement , 391 projects reportedly
served the United States, while 155 projects reported serving a country other than the United
States. The countries most served by TTU outreach and engagement were Canada (6) and Mexico,
India, Honduras, Germany, China, and Brazil (5). A full list of countries served is provided in
Appendix V.
Texas Tech University Outreach and Engagement Partnerships in Texas
Texas Tech University Outreach and Engagement Partnerships in Other U.S. States
Texas Tech University Outreach and Engagement Partnerships in Foreign Countries
Area of Concern and Type of Engagement
The following graphs represent TTU outreach and engagement initiatives by Area of
Concern andType of Engagement. The primary Area of Concern that outreach and engagement
projects addressed was Pre-K-20 Education (24.86%), followed by Community
Development/Arts/Culture/Civic Life (14.49%) and Science and Technology (10.4%).
The primary Types of Engagement involved in faculty and staff outreach and engagement
initiatives were: Engaged Instruction: Public Events and Understanding (18.4%) and Research
and Creative Activity (18.4%), followed by Technical or Expert Assistance (15.4%), and Service
on Boards and Committees (14.0%). See Appendix VI for definitions and examples of each form
of engagement.
Participants and Funding
Numerous external populations were served through TTU’s outreach and engagement
initiatives – from public schools, to community colleges, four-year colleges, business and industry,
government, non-profits, and the general public. Primary and secondary level students (K-12)
were the most prominent participants in TTU’s outreach and engagement efforts. This coincides
with TTU’s primary Area of Concern – Education - with a total of 247,045 K-12 students being
impacted (this variable may include duplicate counts). The total funding generated for projects
reporting Education as an Area of Concern was $8,070,171. The total funding generated for all
initiatives combined during AY’ 15 was $24,038,525.80. Funding came from private business and
industry, state and federal grants, foundations, other non-profit organizations, and event/and
activities fees.
Conclusion
The Academic Year ’15 administration of Raiders Engaged showed a significant increase in
outreach and engagement numbers from 2014 ,which may be due to changes that were made in the
administration of the survey. The 2015 reported number of 657,287 Non-TTU Attendees and
Participants was double that reported for 2014, along with a 100,000 person increase in K-12
participants. Faculty and Staff Involvement Hours also saw an increase compared to 2014. These
changes could be attributed to the broader dissemination of the survey compared to 2014 as well
as the personal follow-up with individual units on campus to encourage participation.
Areas that did not show increase during this year’s administration were Funding Generated and
unique non-TTU Partnerships. Based on a four-year trend, these numbers have consistently
fluctuated from year to year. Due to the self-reported nature of Raiders Engaged, inconsistencies in
these measures are likely due to the type of data reported. OPA is exploring ways to improve
collection of these measures to ensure reliability in future administrations. Nonetheless, it is the
perspective of OPA that the 2015 administration of Raiders Engaged is not only the most reliable
and comprehensive, but represents a pivotal moment in Texas Tech’s assessment of outreach and
engagement. It is our belief with further refinements that next year’s administration will have even
greater validity and reliability
Improvements from Raiders Engaged 2014
The AY ’15 administration of Raiders Engaged featured an enhanced instrumentation
process based on recommendations for improvement from an ad hoc assessment committee as well
as participant feedback from previous administrations. Some of the improvements made to the
survey included earlier initial administration to allow time for communication, follow-up with
areas, and discussion of specific issues with participants. Additionally, data was more easily
accessible by Office of Planning and Assessment (OPA) staff throughout the administration which
allowed for individual follow-up with respondents to obtain further information or clarification.
The usability of the instrument was also improved, which made it easier for respondents to
navigate and complete the survey. Finally, this year’s administration allowed for the uploading of
Raiders Engaged data into DigitalMeasures. To avoid duplication or discrepancies in data, the
respective “Outreach and Engagement” data fields were blocked in DigitalMeasures while the
Raiders Engaged survey was open. After the Raiders Engaged survey closed, OPA uploaded
information into DigitalMeasures accounts giving faculty the option to edit the information for
Annual Reporting. In the future, this aspect of data collection needs to be better communicated to
faculty who may have chosen not to complete the survey and, instead, waited until the fields in
DigitalMeasures were open for input.
Continuous Improvement
The 2015 administration was the most successful administration to date, but further
improvements are underway to create a more streamlined survey for the 2016 administration. We
are aiming to make it easier for respondents to select the geographic locations of their outreach and
engagement projects and partnerships by creating interactive visual maps for Texas, the United
States, and the world. Additionally, respondents will be able to select regions versus individual
counties in the state of Texas since they may not always have the specific break-down of their
activity by county readily available. In addition, an interactive calendar will be added to allow
respondents to individually select the month, year, and date of their specific project. More specific
instructions will also be added to reporting fields that require input of numbers in order to
eliminate error messages received for inputting signs or symbols in addition to numbers. We
further intend to provide a link to the TTU Global Address Book to aid respondents in identifying
and selecting other TTU personnel involved in the project. Moreover, we plan to pre-populate
Internal Partners with a menu of on-campus entities that respondents can select from more easily.
.
Appendix I – Email Invitation from Provost
Appendix II – Institutional Summary
Appendix III – Projects by County
County
Projects
Anderson
20
Andrews
20
Angelina
20
Aransas
20
Archer
20
Armstrong
20
Atascosa
20
Austin
20
Bailey
27
Bandera
22
Bastrop
21
Baylor
22
Bee
20
Bell
22
Bexar
27
Blanco
22
Borden
21
Bosque
20
Bowie
20
Brazoria
20
Brazos
22
Brewster
20
Briscoe
22
Brooks
20
Brown
22
Burleson
20
Burnet
25
Caldwell
20
Calhoun
20
Callahan
22
Cameron
20
Camp
20
Carson
21
Cass
20
Castro
24
Chambers
20
Cherokee
20
Childress
20
Clay
20
Cochran
27
Coke
20
Coleman
21
County
Projects
Collin
24
Collingsworth
20
Colorado
21
Comal
23
Comanche
20
Concho
20
Cooke
20
Coryell
20
Cottle
21
Crane
20
Crockett
20
Crosby
32
Culberson
20
Dallam
20
Dallas
41
Dawson
25
De Witt
20
Deaf Smith
22
Delta
20
Denton
26
Dickens
26
Dimmit
20
Donley
22
Duval
20
Eastland
21
Ector
22
Edwards
24
El Paso
26
Ellis
20
Erath
20
Falls
20
Fannin
22
Fayette
20
Fisher
21
Floyd
27
Foard
21
Fort Bend
21
Franklin
20
Freestone
20
Frio
20
Gaines
30
Galveston
21
County
Garza
Gillespie
Glasscock
Goliad
Gonzales
Gray
Grayson
Gregg
Grimes
Guadalupe
Hale
Hall
Hamilton
Hansford
Hardeman
Hardin
Harris
Harrison
Hartley
Haskell
Hays
Hemphill
Henderson
Hidalgo
Hill
Hockley
Hood
Hopkins
Houston
Howard
Hudspeth
Hunt
Hutchinson
Irion
Jack
Jackson
Jasper
Jeff Davis
Jefferson
Jim Hogg
Jim Wells
Johnson
Projects
30
29
20
20
20
21
22
20
20
22
38
21
20
21
21
20
34
20
20
22
24
21
20
25
20
34
20
20
21
23
20
20
20
20
20
20
21
20
20
20
20
21
County
Projects
Jones
22
Jones
20
Karnes
21
Kaufman
20
Kendall
24
Kenedy
20
Kent
21
Kerr
22
Kimble
22
King
24
Kinney
20
Kleberg
20
Knox
22
La Salle
20
Lamar
20
Lamb
33
Lampasas
21
Lavaca
21
Lee
20
Leon
20
Liberty
20
Limestone
21
Lipscomb
21
Live Oak
21
Llano
21
Loving
20
Lubbock
238
Lynn
34
Madison
20
Marion
20
Martin
21
Mason
24
Matagorda
21
Maverick
21
McCulloch
20
McLennan
22
McMullen
20
Medina
22
Menard
20
Midland
24
Milam
20
Mills
20
Mitchell
22
County
Projects
Montague
20
Montgomery
22
Moore
21
Morris
20
Motley
21
Nacogdoches
20
Navarro
20
Newton
20
Nolan
23
Nueces
21
Ochiltree
21
Oldham
20
Orange
20
Palo Pinto
20
Panola
20
Parker
21
Parmer
25
Pecos
20
Polk
20
Potter
24
Presidio
20
Rains
20
Randall
24
Reagan
21
Real
20
Red River
20
Reeves
21
Refugio
21
Roberts
20
Robertson
20
Rockwall
22
Runnels
21
Rusk
20
Sabine
20
San Augustine
20
San Jacinto
23
San Patricio
20
San Saba
21
Schleicher
20
Scurry
26
Shackelford
21
Shelby
20
Sherman
21
County
Projects
Smith
20
Somervell
20
Starr
20
Stephens
21
Sterling
20
Stonewall
22
Sutton
21
Swisher
25
Tarrant
32
Taylor
22
Terrell
20
Terry
25
Throckmorton
21
Titus
20
Tom Green
23
Travis
27
Trinity
20
Tyler
21
Upshur
20
Upton
20
Uvalde
20
Val Verde
20
Van Zandt
20
Victoria
21
Walker
20
Waller
21
Ward
21
Washington
20
Webb
22
Wharton
20
Wheeler
22
Wichita
20
Wilbarger
21
Willacy
20
Williamson
24
Wilson
20
Winkler
20
Wise
21
Wood
20
Yoakum
26
Young
21
Zapata
20
Zavala
20
Appendix IV – Projects by State
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of
Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Projects
7
5
5
12
11
9
5
5
6
11
9
5
8
9
7
8
8
State
Projects
State
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
7
8
5
6
8
8
7
5
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New
Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
8
9
10
5
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
7
5
15
15
5
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Projects
6
9
15
8
6
5
5
6
9
366
6
5
9
9
6
7
11
Appendix V - Projects by Country
Country
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
American Samoa
Angola
Anguilla
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei Darussalam
Bulgaria
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Cayman Islands
Chile
China
Colombia
Commonwealth of
Dominica
Costa Rica
Cote D'ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Projects
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
4
1
1
1
2
2
1
5
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
5
2
Country
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji
Finland
France
French Polynesia
Gabon
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Greenland
Guadeloupe
Guam
Guatemala
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
1
Jamaica
2
4
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Korea
Kurdistan
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lao People's Democratic
Republic
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Projects
2
1
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
5
1
2
1
5
1
2
2
2
2
4
1
Country
Latvia
Lebanon
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macao
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Martinique
Mauritius
Mexico
Moldova
Monaco
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Northern Mariana Islands
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palestinian Territory
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Reunion
Projects
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
4
1
2
1
1
3
1
2
1
2
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
Country
Romania
Russian Federation
Rwanda
Samoa
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
South Africa
South Korea
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab Republic
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turks and Caicos Islands
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Venezuela
Vietnam
Projects
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1
1
2
Appendix VI - Forms of Engagement Definitions
Clinical Service
Engaged
Instruction: Credit
Courses and
Programs
Engaged
Instruction:
Noncredit Classes
and Programs
All client and patient (human and animal)
care provided by university faculty or staff
through unit-sponsored group practice or
as part of clinical instruction, and by
medical or graduate students as part of
their professional education and practice.
Courses and instructional programs that
offer academic credit hours to nontraditional students - those specifically
designed and marketed to serve those who
are neither traditional campus degree
seekers nor campus staff. Such courses and
programs are often scheduled at times
outside of the university’s traditional
operating hours or delivered via nontraditional means (online, skype, offcampus).
Classes and instructional programs
designed and marketed specifically to nontraditional learners -those who are
neither degree seekers nor on-campus
faculty, staff, or students. These programs
typically provide certificates of completion
or continuing education units to
professionals, career seekers, or lifelong
learners, but do not provide academic
credit.
Engaged
Instruction: Public
Events and
Understanding
Academic or administrative resources
designed for the general public that include
either managed learning environments
(e.g., museums, libraries, gardens, galleries,
exhibits, expositions, demonstrations, fairs);
or educational materials and products
accessible through print, radio, television,
or web media (e.g., pamphlets, web sites,
software, CD’s). The learning experience is
often short-term and directed or paced by
the learner.
Experiential or
Service Learning*
Classes and curricular programs that
enable students to learn with and from
community partners in a community setting
while linking their academic study with
civic needs. Includes any class with a
service learning component in which
students are asked to reflect on their
Examples: Symptom screening of
children exposed to domestic violence;
tax or legal clinics for indigent
populations; family counseling services.
Examples: A weekend MBA program;
an off-campus Master's program in
Education offered in a rural area; an
online certificate program in human
resource management.
Examples: A short-course for engineers
on the use of new composite materials;
a summer math camp for high school
students; a personal enrichment
program for older adults; a summer
institute for bank executives; a
conference on solar technologies
(note: this does not include conferences
that are purely designed for academic
audiences); a seminar for counseling
professionals.
Examples: Exhibits, interactive
displays, demonstrations,
presentations, archival documents that
draw on scholarly knowledge but are
designed for and accessible by the
general public. Pamphlets, booklets,
self-paced online course modules or
CD-ROMs on contents of interest to the
general public (i.e. gardening, shelter
construction, organizational skills,
travel, etc.), software, or textbooks for
lay audiences; Dissemination of
knowledge through media such as
speaker’s bureaus, TV appearances,
newspaper interviews, radio
broadcasts, web pages, and podcasts, if
scholarly and readily available to the
public; popular writings in newsletters,
popular press, or practitioner-oriented
publications.*
Examples: A student-led after-school
health and exercise program for
children; a study abroad trip to Mexico
involving drinking-well construction in
Mexico; a reading program for preschool children at a local library; a
student internship at a wind power
Research and
Creative Activity
Service on Boards
and Committees
Technical or Expert
Assistance
community practice or make connections
between academic content and the
community setting. Activities provide
students with academic credit and are
conducted under the guidance and
supervision of a faculty member. Also
includes study abroad programs with
service learning components. Other forms
of experiential learning include careeroriented practicums or internships
whether at a local, national, or international
location.
Research: Applied or community-based
research specifically targeted at a
community-defined problem and intended
to have a direct impact on a specific
community while creating new knowledge
for the community and the discipline (for
potentially broader societal applications).
Also includes capacity-building,
evaluation and impact assessments, as
well as technology transfer. May be
funded through grants or contracts from
government agencies, businesses,
community-based organizations, nonprofit
agencies, or foundations.
Creative Activity: Original creations of
literary, fine, performing, or applied arts
and other expressions of creative
disciplines or fields at the university that
are made available to or generated in
collaboration with external, public
audiences.
Contributions of scholarly or professional
expertise by faculty or staff to nonuniversity audiences on an ad hoc or
ongoing basis via local, national, or
international boards or committees.
Activities in which faculty or staff respond
to requests from individuals, programs, or
agencies and organizations external to the
university by sharing their knowledge,
expertise, and skills in order to help those
entities achieve their goals. There is direct
interaction with the external constituency
(as opposed to responding by delivering a
pamphlet or reference to a Web site or the
like).
production plant.
Examples: A U.S. Beef Processing
Study for Food Industry Specialists; a
community garden project in a “foodarm” neighborhood; an after-school
mentoring program for educationally
disadvantaged students.
Examples: community performances;
after school enrichment programs in
theatre, dance, music, or the arts; film
and video productions.
Examples: Service on Child Protective
Services Board; Participation in ad hoc
committee on addressing gang violence
in certain parts of the city.
Examples: Providing expertise to
address or improve the effectiveness
and efficiency of an organization or to
improve knowledge and skills;
providing expert testimony and other
forms of legal advice; consulting work
for the benefit of the constituent;
assisting agencies or businesses with
analyzing production processes.
Appendix VII – Raiders Engaged Survey Questions
1.
During which Academic Year(s) did your project take place?
2.
What is the exact Title of the Project (Program or Activity)?
3.
Please provide a brief description.
4.
What is the current Status of the Project?
5.
Is this project an individual, institutional, multi-institutional project?
6.
Provide a Summary of the Project/Activity Results.
7.
Project Start Date (if exact date is unknown select the first date of the month when it began)
8.
What are the Forms of Engagement used in this Project? Select the top one or two forms of
engagement.
9.
o
Clinical Service
o
Engaged Instruction: Credit
o
Engaged Instruction: Non-Credit
o
Engaged Instruction: Public Events and Understanding
o
Experiential or Service Learning
o
Research and Creative Activity
o
Service on Boards and Committees
o
Technical or Expert Assistance
o
Not Applicable
o
Unknown
o
Other (Specify)
What are the Societal Issues addressed? Select the top one or two issues.
o
Business/Economic Development
o
Community Development/Arts/Culture/Civic Life
o
Education (Pre-K - 20)
o
Environment/Natural Resources/Land Use
o
Global Issues
o
Governance and Public Policy
o
Health and Health Care
o
Facilities and Construction
o
Safety and Security
o
Science and Technology
o
Youth and Family Relationships & Well-Being
o
Not Applicable
o
Unknown
o
Other (Specify)
10. What are the Domains that were impacted by this Project/ Activity? Select the top one or two
domains.
o
Economy
o
Health and Human Life
o
Human Capital
o
Human Relations/Behavior/Well-Being
o
Infrastructure
o
Intellectual Property
o
Quality of Life
o
Recruitment
o
Research
o
Rural Life
o
Social Empowerment
o
Teaching and Learning
o
Technology Transfer
o
University-Community Ties
o
Urban Environment
o
Not Applicable
o
Unknown
o
Other (Specify)
11. External Funding Sources: Please provide the total Amount of external Funding or Revenue
generated through the Project for the Report Year
12. What were the Sources of Funding or Revenue? Select all that apply
o
Private Business/Industry
o
Federal Grant
o
State Grant
o
Foundations
o
Other Non-Profit Organizations
o
Event/Activities Fees
o
Other (Specify)
13. Please select the Population served by your Project during the Report Year and indicate how many
Individuals were served in each Category.
o
K-12 students, administrators, teachers
o
Community college students, faculty, staff
o
Other 4-Year institutions’ students, faculty, staff
o
Private business & industry
o
Government
o
Non-profit agencies
o
General public
o
Other:

Description

Number Served
14. Who were the primary Partners in this Project? Please select the institutions, organizations, or
agencies that you worked with from the drop down list provided.
15. External (External Partner/Organization)
16. Internal (Internal Partner/Organization)
17. Which Texas Counties were directly affected by this Project? (Required)*
18. Which States were directly affected by this Project?
19. Specific Countries served by the Project/Activity (Select all that apply)
20. What was your Primary Role in the Project?
o
Project Manager
o
Key Personnel
o
Lead/PI
o
Co-PI
21. Please provide the Email Address of any other TTU Faculty or Staff member who was involved this
project.
22. Approximate Total Number of Hours Spent by TTU Faculty on Project/Activity for the current
reporting year.
23. Approximate Total Number of Hours Spent by TTU Staff on Project/Activity for the current reporting
year.