Interview with Steven T. Cook

Troy Reeves 00:01

Okay, Today is July 8, 2021. This is an interview with Steven Cook. We're doing this interview for Academic Staff Award Winners Oral History Project. My name is Troy Reeves. This interview is being done remotely through Teams. So I'm in my home in Madison, Wisconsin. Steve, for sound quality purposes. Could you start by saying your name and spelling your last name?

Steve Cook 00:25

Steven Cook. c. o. o. k. But I go by Steve. Okay, that's fine. Yeah.

Troy Reeves 00:32

Great. Thank you, Steve. Alright, so as I said, just before I hit record on the tool, that we're going to start at the top here. And that first question off that topic list I gave you is: What brought you to UW Madison?

Steve Cook 00:50

Well, where should I begin? [Laughter] So I, I grew up in Wisconsin, I grew up in Oshkosh and had gone away to school in Minnesota at Carleton College for undergrad, and then out to DC where I worked for the US Agency for International Development after, after my undergraduate education, and became interested in pursuing sort of further work in international development. So I applied to a bunch of schools. And including the sociology program here at Wisconsin, which has a part of that program, which is focused on the sociology of what they call the sociology of economic change. But it's, it's focused on issues around economic development. I, you know, just from having grown up in Wisconsin, I was familiar a little bit with, with, with Madison, and had some friends that I had been in undergrad with who were in the sociology program here. So I, when I was accepted here, and along with the fact that being from in state allowed me to get, do it, having in-state tuition, there was a good incentive for me to come to Madison. And I have not regretted it. So yeah, so it was it was to come back to grad school to participate in sociology.

Troy Reeves 02:31

I have my mic on mute. Okay, so we don't I don't have any background noise and I keep forgetting that I do that but you can hear me now. And so I wonder if you could talk a little bit more about the, the, the time that you came for graduate school and then maybe a little bit about the, the graduate work itself before we get into some of this other stuff?

Steve Cook 02:49

Sure. So um, you know, as I said, I had started to come here with the intention of pursuing this sociology, sociology of economic change program. But there was 00:03:00a funding offer traineeship in the demography program, so demography is another part of the sociology program. So do I kind of had in my mind this, "okay, I'll combine the sociology of economic change and demography, into a into a program." [I] came here and did some work in that as a as a early grad student. And then was hired as a as an RA by Gary Sandefur, who was sociology professor and then later went on to greater and better things, here and then later at Oklahoma State to work on a book that he was doing, looking at the role that growing up in a single a single parent household plays in, in young children's lives, and how it relates to to their economic outcomes especially. And so that work, got me a little bit more focused on looking at underprivileged in America in the US, and a little less in the international aspect, which I had originally come for. And through Gary got involved in some other projects that we're being run through the through IRP projects that Maria Canshawn [sic?] and Dan Meyer, both were heading here. And so, you know, I was a very slowly, slow progressing grad student. And by, I'd come in 1991 by the late 90s. I was, I'd finished my master's but was still sort of very early on in the ABD process, and so they asked, I guess what we're happy with the work that I had been doing as, as an RA and asked if I would be interested in working full time for IRP. So some of the projects they were working on in IRP. So I started, accepted, and started doing that in 2000. September of 2000.

Troy Reeves 05:30

Great, thank you, Steve. Yeah. So now when I think back up a little bit, even sort of pre- UW-Madison, to ask about what factors led to your, to both your research interest, and then you know, eventually just the work that you're doing?

Steve Cook 05:44

Yeah. So, you know, it's, it's, it's all been a little happenstance, and sort of, you know, I come across things, and there are opportunities, and I pursue those opportunities. Rather than having gone into this with a with a clear goal 00:06:00or purpose in mind, I, my undergraduate degree was in history. I went out to DC, very much on kind of a whim, thinking I can find a job that was related to public policy or, and, and kind of lucked into this job with with USAID. But that, you know, so I think the, the, the constant signal through all of this has been kind of my interest in being involved in in public policy, and thinking about the way that public policy can affect people's lives. And so, that was true at USAID, that was sort of what I came back to grad school to pursue. And even though the focus of that shifted a little bit to be more about the US rather than international, it really, you know, I really was very much interested in thinking, in thinking, pursuing a career in and thinking about the ways in which public policy can help underprivileged people. And so and thought very much that even a grad school degree would lead to that kind of work, research and evaluation work or public policy development work, rather than being a faculty somewhere. So, yeah, I was never really on the academic track, or the tenure track, even even here pursuing my PhD. So when this opportunity arose, you know, very much fit into that desire of being able to be involved in work that was very much focused on public policy. Almost all the work that I do at IRP is work that is either for state agencies or federal agencies, and relevant to policy development and programmatic questions that they're interested in. And so you know, very much feel like I'm doing work that is likely to re-- to lead to policy changes or draft the result in, in, in outcomes that will, that will positively affect people's lives. But I get to do it in this great academic environment where I'm surrounded by people who think very rigorously about the right way to do things. methodologically and, and plus all the other benefits of being in an academic environment, all the all the great things about being on a university campus.

Troy Reeves 08:46

Great, thank you. So I think this will lead into the next question. But I think even though we have oral histories, and we have documentation about the Institute for Research on Poverty, I wonder if you could, you know, spend just a 00:09:00couple minutes explaining to whoever might listen to this. What that, what that institute is and what it's all about?

Steve Cook 09:08

Yeah. So IRP, Institute for Research on Poverty, is a, is a multidisciplinary research center here on campus, it's part of the College of Letters and Sciences. But it's been around since the mid '60s. It was originally developed as kind of part of the original war on poverty. Lyndon Johnson's program back in the '50s. Robert Lampman, was an economist here at IRP, who was involved in the development of the Social Security program and other public benefit programs that were that were being developed in the '60s and, and got federal funding to put together this Poverty Research Center here on campus. And it's, it's existed for you know, well over 50 years now. That it's had funding from the federal government all of that time, first kind of direct funding, and then later, we go through every three to five years, there's a competition that the Department of Health and Human Science, science, Services does to, to, to award funding to a poverty center on campus. And every single one of those funding rounds, IRP has received at least some funding from that. So we, we are currently and sort of traditionally call ourselves the the National Poverty Research Center for the country. And, you know, a lot of, a lot of work happens here, looking at welfare programs, welfare reform, child welfare, child support, waste, wasted funding goes into public education. So a lot of different aspects of public policy that can affect poor people.

Troy Reeves 11:09

Thank you. So now, let's, let's shift that, and I, you've talked about this a little bit in some of the answers to the questions. But let's, let's talk directly now, when someone asks, you know, what do you do for IRP, how do you describe what you do?

Steve Cook 11:24

Well in very general terms, I, as I said, I, you know, I look at public issues around public policy, effectiveness and, and efficiencies in the way that public policy programs are run. And, and how both policies can affect people. Primarily underprivileged people. And so, you know, sometimes that's, that's very specific, a public agency will come to us with, oh, we're thinking about doing 00:12:00this new policy, can you, you know, can you tell us what you think the results of doing something like this would be? Sometimes it's they, they get funding from the feds to do something. And part of that funding says, this needs to be evaluated. So what they will come to IRP and ask for, and work, and do contract with us to do an evaluation of some new public policy that's happened. On a, on a kind of more specific level and sort of as to what I do, my job is kind of dual fold. One is I, I pursue my own research agenda. So I have done, I have done work as part of contracts around child welfare, you know, looking at questions about when you take children out of the home, because of child abuse, or child maltreatment, what are some policies that will help the parents get back to a point where they can bring those children back home. I've also looked at, you know, some issues around if you can't bring those children back home, what's the best way to sort of identify a new parent that might adopt those children. And so working on some policies on that, I've also done a lot of work around child support. So when parents split up, and one parent is required to pay child support to the other parent, for the raising of their children, you know, what, what policies help those parents pay that those child support obligations. And so and so those, those are all kind of in my specific research agenda. And I, I've been involved in other people's projects that look at those questions. And I've led a few of those projects on my own. But in addition to that, we at IRP, have put together a large administrative data resource that basically is there to provide data for people to look at all sorts of questions around public policy. And we work with state agencies in Wisconsin to get access to their administrative data, and have built what's called, what we call the Wisconsin administrative data core, with the state agencies that you know, so we collect data from the, from the state welfare system, and data from the child welfare system, the child support system, and the Department of Corrections about people who are in prison and DPI about children's educational experiences. And we bring that to IRP. And we merge all that data together and create this resource that has been actually extremely valuable to let people, you know, 00:15:00apply for research funding. And they say, oh, you know, I know I can do, I can look at this research question, because the data already exists and has already been put together to do these kinds of questions. So that working on putting that, that data resource together as is, right now probably quite occupies the majority of my time. It requires a lot of negotiation with state agencies, all that data, shared use, you know, with formal data sharing agreements. But there's also just a lot of relationship building where you have to get those agencies to trust you. And, and so that means, you know, basically a lot of hand holding and, and communication and just this is this, welp, yes, we have your data, and this is how we're keeping it safe and secure. And this is how we're using it. And, and we're keeping you informed about all of this. So, so that's, that's a big chunk of my time there.

Troy Reeves 16:04

Just maybe, excuse me, maybe a quick follow up about that. Since you're working with state agencies, and I assume you've been doing this most of your most of your time at IRP, I wonder if you could talk about how perhaps changes in administration have changed, or maybe not changed the work that you've tried to do with these state agencies?

Steve Cook 16:28

Yeah, so that, you know, that has always been a big fear that we've had is that these relationships we have with state agencies will, will disappear with the change of an administration or that they will perceive that, oh, this initiative is a product of the previous administration, and we don't want to support it, you know, not necessarily because we think you're doing anything bad, or that you're misusing data or anything, but it's just, you know, we don't want to, we don't want to support whatever the old guy did. Fortunately, you know, we've managed to avoid that and, and a lot of that is, I think, do you know, due to some conscious efforts on our part, to make sure that we're establishing relationships, you know, through the full breadth of an agency, so we don't just go and talk to departmental leadership. And I mean, that departmental leadership changes with each new administration, but we, we have very strong relationships with kind of mid-rung people, the people who, who stay from administration to administration, and, and try to make, and try to make it clear to them by act, and by word and deed, the value of the work that we're doing for their work. And so when new administrations come in, I think that the message that gets pushed from the bottom up, is, is you know, that this is an incredibly valuable 00:18:00resource for the, for the state agencies, to allow them to get the answers and the policy decisions that they want to have. You know, and, and we're certainly determined not to compromise our academic values in the work that we do. But, but at the same time, we're sort of conscious of the political nature of some of the work that we do, and try to present that work in as politically neutral a term as we can, so that, you know, it's about it's about the findings we have, it's not about supporting one political ideology or agenda or another. And so that's, you know, I think that has been a very important, important kind of value that we've maintained and has allowed us to maintain strong relationships, regardless of those changes in, in federal or state administrations.

Troy Reeves 19:04

Thank you. So, I want to give you space just to talk a bit more if there are other things that comprise a typical day I know you said that this the work around the data core is a large amount of the work that you do, but are there other things that you do during again, I put in quotes "typical" day.

Steve Cook 19:24

So, most of the research agenda type work that I do is, is involves statistical quantitative analysis. So, as I said, you know, a big chunk of my sociology training was in demography. And so that means a lot of the research and analysis that I do is, is statistical. So, other people go out and and talk to people in the field and, you know, do surveys or collect data Or have conversations with people, I mostly look at administrative data and see how, you know, how does this variable relate to this variable. And, you know, if we change this particular policy, how does it affect this outcome that we see in the data. So that means a lot of, you know, sitting at a computer, and writing code in, in programming code and running statistical models, and, and seeing whether differences are statistically significant. That's sort of, that's the, the key threshold that we sort of used to determine whether things we're seeing are important or not. And so that's, you know, that's a very solo kind of work. Mostly, you know, it's stuff you do alone, sitting at a, sitting at a computer. Now, some of the prep work for that, and sort of, you know, making sure that 00:21:00data is prepped in a way that allows that kind of work involves, you know, involves collaborations with other people at IRP, who, often. T he data side of my job is meeting, meeting, meeting. So that's, you know, that has been, you know, you go and have probably three or four meetings a week with people at state agencies, or, or people, I also kind of inter, interface with faculty and other staff people here at UW, who are interested in using that data, and are putting together research projects. So I'll also meet with them and talk about how their research project idea may or may not benefit from the data that we've collected. And if so, you know, how, how we can get permission for them to use that data for their project. And what funding would be necessary to make that happen? And things like that. So a lot of meetings. I, due to my work with the state agencies on data issues I've been asked to do, you know, to be involved in some policy kind of consultation with state agencies as well. So I, I, a few years ago, served on a Wisconsin Legislative Council committee on on issues around fraud and welfare use. And I've been working with the state court system on the advisory panel on their research, research and evaluation priorities for, for the council. So, so I, you know, I got to have some interactions with, with higher up people on kind of high level policy things as well. But most of it is a little bit more sort of in the trenches work. Looking at sort of how do we make the logistics of this data access happen? And in that, obviously, all of that side of things have changed a lot with, with the pandemic. And so things have, you know, for the most part, have continued with lots and lots of meetings, they're just all happening online now. And I get to sit at home in my office, as most of us for the last year.

Troy Reeves 23:43

So since you mentioned COVID. And I'm wondering, and you talked about this one, you know that the change that we've all, almost all of us have gone through moving from face to face meetings to remote meetings. Are there other ways that the pandemic has changed your work over the last 15, 16 months?

Steve Cook 24:07

Well, no, I mean, the big answer is no. You know, I think it's, you know, I'm meeting largely with the same people that I met with before. There has been some, you know, obviously issues of responsiveness. State agencies have been, I mean I think the university did an incredibly amazing job of, of picking up the ball, you know, you know, things they like, "oh my god, how do we do this in a completely different environment?" And I think the university really, you know, was incredible in, in providing the resources, the tools, access to the to the necessary tools to allow most of the work that I do to continue pretty much in the same way. So I, you know, had remote access to all of the computing resources that I've needed. The, the, you know, the virtual meeting tools and virtual conferencing tools that we have, have been great. Many of the state agencies have, were not quite as nimble in picking that up. And so there have been a lot of delays in their, in their sort of responsiveness to requests that we make of them their ability to have meetings or ability to make decisions about things. And I think some of that has been, has been due to COVID. And so, you know, that has a kind of secondary impact on us, because we're not getting the responses that we need sometimes to do the, to make decisions that we need to make and things like that. But, but in terms of, you know, the basics of sitting down and doing the computer work, for my research work, or doing the meetings that I need to have, for, for the data access kind of side of things, almost all of that has continued kind of in a different format, but but pretty much the same, the same work that was going on before.

Troy Reeves 26:15

Okay. So I want to I want to ask you this technology question sort of writ large, you know, about your, your 20 years, and maybe even your work as a grad student too. And so, you know, how have changes in technology changed your work?

Steve Cook 26:32

Yeah, so, you know, I started as a grad student '91. So that was, you know, people were using email, by then, which was not true in my undergraduate years, or in my, or even in my work at USAID in the in the late '80s. But by the '90s, sort of the primary means of communication that we had with people was by, was by email. And so the, that has been happening, that has happened, and the IRP 00:27:00has had access to pretty well developed statistical computing resources. You know, back from the very beginning, of course, back in the very beginning, in the '60s, there was punch cards, and you know, the much more primitive kind of computing technology, but so we've had access to all of that, the IRP, as part of, or a member in the Social Science Computing Cooperative, which is kind of a computing hub on campus. An IT department on campus, that, it's kind of set up by IRP, the sociology department. I think economics was involved for a - a few, a few depart- social science-related departments, sort of had developed their own IT department, you know, this before DoIT existed, and the campus was really providing the full range of computing resources that we need, so. So we've been very lucky to have have that, that computing resource available to us. You know, of course, the scope and scale and speed of those computing resources has dramatically changed over the years. And so you know, now we're in a position, this, the data core that I talked about, is, you know, is a, has 8 million people in it. And you know, all of their programmatic participation and welfare and all these other programs that I mentioned, over the course of 20 to 30 to 40 years in some cases. And so it's, it's very large, big datasets that we're dealing with. And that's not data that we could have dealt with back, you know, back 20 years ago. But those, the computing resources have kept up to allow us to do all that. One of the big changes that's happened is a constant and steady concern about confidentiality and privacy issues. And so, you know, we've always, of course, have always been concerned about making sure that we're, we're keeping data secure, but the concerns from the state agencies about that have ratcheted up over the course of time, often in response to publicity about some bad thing happening, fortunately never with us, but you know, either internally in their agencies or elsewhere and you know, the some of the data we 00:30:00have is HIPAA-protected data. So there are federal requirements around the way that, that that kind of data is protected. There's also school records we have. And so there's FERPA, FERPA also requirements. So as, the, as all those requirements have come into place, we've had to turn to the Social Science Computing Cooperative, to develop new security measures. And those have involved the Campus Office of Cybersecurity as well. So in the last four to five years, we've, we've essentially created a whole new super secure server system that allows us to store this data in a way that makes it much, would make it much more difficult for bad actors to, to get access to that data, and also allows us to, to keep track in a better way of who has access to the data and, and, and control when and where and how that data can be used. And so addressing that has been very laborious, because it's to some extent, we were inventing the wheel with, along with cyber, the Office of Cybersecurity and, and SSCC, in sort of trying to figure out well, what exactly is, do these federal requirements mean? And, you know, what, what specifically do we have to do to to implement, implement security arrangements that comply with those? But, you know, I think we're, we're finally in a position where we have a system that, one: certainly meets all those requirements, and two: seems to assuage all of the concerns that the state agencies have, have voiced over the years and so feeling pretty good about that. Knock on wood.

Troy Reeves 32:05

Right? Yeah, yeah. Okay, Steve, I want to switch to a few questions about academic staff, being academic staff in general. The first is, or were you or have you been involved in academic staff governance or groups?

Steve Cook 32:22

So I really haven't. And that's, I think, in at this point, in my career, that's actually been a little bit of a regret that I did not get involved early. I think some of that was due to my early on, I sort of was thinking myself as much of a student, as a student, even, even after I had started working full time for IRP. You know, I was still ABD, and still kind of thought, thinking of myself half as a student, half as staff. And so, you know, I sort of said, oh, well, you know, the staff thing is of interest to other people, not so much to me. I, 00:33:00you know, I think I could play a role, could play more of a role, and, and I'm looking forward to the possibility of doing so in the future, but so far, no.

Troy Reeves 33:16

All right. So then the next question is, is a general question about, you know, in your time here, have you thought about the relationship between faculty and staff? And if so, you know, what are your thoughts about it?

Steve Cook 33:28

Yeah, that's, you know, that's, when you had sent over the list of questions. That was the one I sort of had to think hardest about. And it's, it's a good question. It's, it's, I personally have felt very, very well treated by faculty. So I think some of that's kind of the selectivity of, of who has run things here at IRP, the faculty that have been involved in IRP. You know, we've had a great series of faculty directors at IRP, who, almost all of them have gone on to be involved in higher up university governance. So as I mentioned, Gary Sandefur and Maria Cancian and Karl Schultz was a, was a director here as well. And Ronnie Berger, who now is working in the provo-, and, no, in the Vice Chancellor for Research's office, but so, you know, for the most part, all of those, all of those directors have, I think, you know, very much perceived that that academic staff and universities classified what once were classified staff are now university staff. You know, we're work important partners in making the making IRP run well, and, you know, it was very much a collaborative sort of leadership process, rather than we're here to support our star faculty members. You know, that's not to say that I haven't occasionally run into faculty members who are, feel a little bit more entitled or demanding. And, but that, that has been a very infrequent occurrence. And for the most part, I have felt, you know, when dealing with, with situations like that I felt well, well supported by that leadership in IRP to give the responses back that I needed to give, as as to, as the requirements of the job dictated. So, you know, it's never, it's never been a huge problem. So, you know, most mostly, very, I think it's been very positive, very positive relationship. And, and, and valuable. I mean, you know, 00:36:00I, so it's, it's not just, you know, what, are they treating you well, or not treating me well, but, you know, I felt like a partner, in people's research projects, you know, so I, my expertise in certain areas has been recognized. My, my knowledge about the data that we put together has been recognized, and I've been brought in as, as kind of an expert resource by faculty to, to, you know, to contribute to, to some of their projects. And so, you know, it's, it's not just been a benign relationship, it's, you know, it's been one that I have found very positive, for the most part, and, and, and also valuable, you know, I were, I mean, not only are, am I big gaining from my expertise to the whatever it is, but I'm certainly gaining from from the amazing expertise of the people that work on, for the fact that, the people that work on this campus.

Troy Reeves 37:14

Great. So, the last question before I asked you, if you have anything to add, is a story about the award itself. So, you know, you won the Chancellor's Award for Excellence in Research, critical research support. So, you know, from the time nomination through the reception, anything that jumps out that you want to address about that?

Steve Cook 37:39

Yeah. Um, so my nomination for that was something I'll confess that I pushed a little bit, you know, so I was aware that these awards were out there, and people got them, there have been some IRP people that have gotten, gotten these awards in the past, and I sort of, you know, looked at my career and the things that I had done and, and thought I might be a good, a good candidate for, for this. And, and I will admit, and kind of mentioned it, nudged my supervisor and Institute leadership, they were very quickly responsive to the idea and, and eager to, to make that happen. And so, you know, I feel like hopefully, I didn't, I didn't completely, was completely out of line in pushing that at the beginning. You know, was, was quite surprised to, to have gotten it kind of on the first, the first time I was nominated. Not because I felt like my, my 00:39:00accomplishments were lacking. So much as I just, I know how much other good stuff goes on on this campus, and just felt for certain that there, you know, there must be lots of very well accomplished people who, who would have applied for these awards and that the competition would be will be quite steep. Of course, I have no idea exactly what the situation was, in that regard. But certainly felt very humbled and an honor to, to, to receive the award this year. So that was, I was stunned a little bit right at the beginning. But yes, very proud.

Troy Reeves 39:44

And can you talk a little bit about the reception, because I assume it was virtual.

Steve Cook 39:49

It was so you know, I mean, frankly, as, as many of our experiences this year, a bit of a, you know, anticlimax or a little bit of a disappointment in that, that we couldn't all meet in public, in person, and, and, and share in each other's accomplishments in person, I would have enjoyed that opportunity. But, you know, I thought that the, the committee did, or whoever put that together, I guess the academic staff, faculty, I'm sorry, the academic staff, Secretary of the Academic Staff had put that together. And I, you know, given the limitations that we were all under, I thought they did a great job. And I was I was very happy to do that, that we got, you know, received our little snack, kind of the food that I think, you know, we normally would have been sent out at the, at that in person meeting got sent to us as a delivery along with the plaque, and everything like that. So it was, it was a good second best.

Troy Reeves 41:13

Thank you, Steve. So, before I ask you, if there's anything about your time you want to discuss, I do want to ask a question. Since we have a couple minutes. You've mentioned a couple of times about the word. You've mentioned the word "underprivileged." And so I'm wondering if you would talk about, you know, your journey on how you have decided upon working with and working for a group that is interested in trying to help out those who are less privileged than others?

Steve Cook 41:52

That's a tough question to answer. I mean, I, it's, you know, I know some people, sometimes people will pursue a certain area because, oh, you know, I 00:42:00grew up in a poor, in a poor family, or, you know, I, I have had experience with, with poor people, with people who are in an underprivileged situation, and I wanted to help understand that better. And, and certainly, you know, I've known people who are less privileged. My, personally, I mean, my family was, was, that I grew up in was sort of solidly middle class family, my parents both worked at the university in Oshkosh. And so, you know, I don't really have that personal touchstone that made me pursue this. But, you know, I, to some extent, I think it's kind of a recognition of, of that, that somewhat privilege, that I grew up with, you know, both economic privilege and demographic privilege, you know, is something I recognized was just, you know, kind of luck. And, and I recognized that there's a lot of people in our society who are not fortunate to have a stable family to grow up in, or families with resources to, to send them off to college, or some of those things that I have. And so, you know, I think it's, it's, it's much more recognition that there's a lot of inequality in our, in our society. And I and, and there always will be, I'm under no illusion that we're ever going to do anything that that dramatically changes that base that people start at. But we can, there are policies that can help people overcome those initial hurdles. And, you know, and frankly, I think it's a responsibility of society, and the government that we elect, to, to do all it can to help people achieve their, their full potential and, and, and that means making sure that they have the resources, especially as children to, to establish a good lives for themselves. And so that's, that's sort of where I, where I've come from, from my, my interests and concerns about these issues.

Troy Reeves 44:44

Thank you, Steve. So the last question is, you know, really to see if there's other things in the few minutes we have about your UW time that you you would like to get on this oral history.

Steve Cook 44:56

Yeah, I. So I, you know, I think I, I hinted a little bit about this before, 00:45:00when I talked about what an ideal, ideal kind of job and situation I perceived working at IRP to be, and and it allowing me to be both involved in the kind of hands, hands-on influential policy-related research that I've been able to do. But at the same time, being in this academic environment, where you have, I mean, just the stimulation, and, and expertise that you're kind of constantly surrounded with. So, every day, I find myself involved in conversations with extremely smart people who know a lot about some particular area. And, and, you know, sometimes that doesn't lead to anything. And other times, it's like, oh, you know, this, the fact that you've said something about some field that I've never really been interested in, or never really had the involvement in, but oh, that, that actually kind of relates to work that I do. And, I mean, it's, it's just a, a cauldron to, in which one's intellectual environment is just, you know, as always, always has the potential for being stimulated and for developing new ideas. And, and just working with students. So, you know, I'm not, I'm not a faculty member, so I'm not out teaching classes or anything like that. But I do work with a lot of students who are working as research assistants and, and project assistants on these various projects. A lot of them, you know, are very smart and bring interesting things to the table, and si-, and, but you know, it's also just kind of a joy to work with, with incoming people like that, and help them get started on their way as well. So, you know, I think the big thing is just, you know, just a, an expression of what a positive experience I find working on a university campus. Yes. And, and I think probably UW is this way, as much if not more than a lot of other universities, where, you know, things like the Wisconsin Idea, are actually, you know, are valued. And, and working with state agencies on these kinds of questions are valued, and recognized as being an important part of the academic experience. 00:48:00And we're not just an ivory tower. So. So I think, you know, that's kind of the big important, I think, important feeling about, about this job and the work I've done over the last 20 years as an academic staff member here.

Troy Reeves 48:21

Great. Well, thank you for that. Those final thoughts and thank you for the time you gave me. I want to talk with you a minute or two after we shut down the recording. But this concludes the oral history with Steve Cook. Steve, thank you so much for your time.

Steve Cook 48:35

Thanks, glad to, glad to chat.