{"id":1007,"date":"2026-08-29T18:14:39","date_gmt":"2026-08-29T18:14:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/?p=1007"},"modified":"2026-08-29T18:18:50","modified_gmt":"2026-08-29T18:18:50","slug":"why-students-cant-simply-choose-engagement","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/?p=1007","title":{"rendered":"Why Students Can’t Simply “Choose” Engagement"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

In recent years campuses everywhere have been reporting alarming levels of absenteeism and underperformance. It\u2019s certainly something I hear a lot from colleagues at UC Irvine, many of whom are left scratching their heads about exact causes.\u00a0And of course,\u00a0it\u2019s typical to lay the blame on students\u00a0rather than anything relating to instruction or the university itself. Affect theory\u00a0can help in finding better answers.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

Let\u2019s start with how faculty talk about engagement. The typical focus is nearly always on learners themselves. Students choose to scroll or skip class. They take shortcuts or use AI. Of course these behaviors frustrate educators. But they are little more than symptoms of what\u2019s really going on. Most learners have studied hard to get into college and borrow heavily to remain there. The vast majority want to do the work, care about the material, and value courses. But they still can\u2019t bring themselves to fully function. They may show up, take notes, say the right things, and yet still feel nothing. That is not simply a decision. It \u2018s a mental state. And often a defensive one.<\/p>\n

Classrooms operate\u00a0as\u00a0affective machines,\u00a0creating\u00a0a vast array of feelings and\u00a0physical reactions\u00a0in\u00a0students.\u00a0While many educators blame educational problems on motivation\u00a0or\u00a0attention lapses,\u00a0they in fact stem\u00a0from\u00a0the\u00a0systemic creation\u00a0of negative\u00a0affect by policiesof the kind critiqued in these pages.\u00a0\u00a0Meritocratic institutions produce\u00a0conditions of\u00a0\u201caffective scarcity,\u201d\u00a0in which\u00a0success, recognition, and belonging are limited resources\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0fought\u00a0for\u00a0individually\u00a0rather than collectively.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Learners internalize beliefs that their struggles stem from personal deficits and nothing else.\u00a0The resulting shame\u00a0is\u00a0so\u00a0normalized\u00a0that\u00a0failures\u00a0become quietly accepted,\u00a0making\u00a0studentsagents\u00a0of their own oppression.\u00a0They focus on improving\u00a0themselves,\u00a0measuring\u00a0their\u00a0success through\u00a0performance metrics, and\u00a0aligningwith\u00a0institutional\u00a0standards. Today\u2019s\u00a0pervasive culture\u00a0of\u00a0mistrust adds to\u00a0the degradation of\u00a0students\u2019\u00a0learning experiences.\u00a0Learners\u00a0are\u00a0monitored by\u00a0LMSs\u00a0tracking\u00a0online behavior, exam proctoring software, and AI-detection\u00a0algorithms\u00a0presuming dishonesty.<\/p>\n

Busy faculty can miss these subtleties because they read behavior as a transparent matter. They suspect that students procrastinate because they don\u2019t care. Missing class means they must be lazy. An anxious appearance signals fragility.\u00a0\u00a0AI use is simply cheating. While these interpretations may make a certain kind of sense, they can misinterpret the learner\u2019s internal experience. Students don\u2019t simply react in the moment. Rather they anticipate the classroom, act on their fears, prepare for potential outcomes. Their bodies react when instruction generates anxiety and defensive reactions, often in unconscious ways.<\/p>\n

Freud called education an \u201cimpossible profession.\u201d In saying this, he didn\u2019t mean that that education is ineffective. Freud was describing the often unknown and uncontrollable outcomes of learning encounters, many of which aren\u2019t fully transparent to students themselves. This means that faculty can\u2019t always know how students will react to their teaching.[i]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0Learners don\u2019t begin courses as blank slates. They arrive with minds preloaded with prior experiences of judgment.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Add to this the current mood of campuses today (exhaustion, surveillance, competition) along with the uncertainty of the world outside, and it\u2019s clear that for many students there is no way to see learning as an invitation. Many see college as a test of their worth.\u00a0\u00a0A term like \u201cmotivation\u201d hardly can account for all of this in suggesting that students simply need more desire to learn. What learners actually require is less fear and risk of failure.<\/p>\n

One way to look at this is through the concept of the unconscious. According to psychoanalyst Jacque Lacan, the unconscious is more than a repository of hidden impulses. It\u2019s a system of symbols, signs, and methods that shape human identity.[ii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Key elements of the Lacanian unconscious are desire and lack, manifest in students as behaviors to please, receive recognition, or simply get good grades. In intimidating classes or simply when things don\u2019t go well, learners may unconsciously disconnect because they can no longer find a sense of self in the learning exchange. In this situation, student disengagement can signal a counter-reaction to authority in maintaining subjective existence in the face of unhealthy demands.<\/p>\n

Sometimes\u00a0this simply is a matter of prior conditioning.[iii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0When someone\u2019s upbringing has been inconsistent, punitive, or indifferent, their adult educational behavior can be more rigid or reactionary.\u00a0\u00a0Some become hypervigilant. Others shut down. Still others do both, oscillating between anxious over-functioning and sudden collapse. This is not a personality type. It is an acquired response to a world that does not feel safe.\u00a0Many aspects of college are like insecure environments. Students receive constant evaluations, but their feedback is typically thin, delayed, or transactional. In competitive classrooms offering little support, they are told to be independent or even \u201ctake risks,\u201d only to be punished for doing so.<\/p>\n

Within this framework grading shifts from a neutral measure to symbolic event. A good grade signals reassurance and membership in a successful or otherwise \u201csafe\u201d group. Ironically, such rewards also can generate fear and a dependency as learners develop obsessions with tests and grades. Faculty sometimes report students confessing \u201caddictions\u201d to academic success. While this might seem a casual joke, it\u2019s also an extremely accurate metaphor. When a student\u2019s brain interprets approval as safety, academic achievement can become a substitute for emotional regulation.<\/p>\n

This is how compliance becomes its own reward. Rather than a passive or dull surrender, obedience can give learners an illusion of control. Course rubrics tell them exactly how NOT to fail, offering ways to produce acceptable work without wandering into uncertainty. Rigid systems can feel safer than open-ended ones if the student is preoccupied about being exposed. When this is true, the very \u201cfreedom\u201d of open inquiry and experiment can register as danger. This isn\u2019t because students are immature, but because the social cost of being wrong is high, and so many have learned to equate uncertainty with punishment. One result is that students become attached to the very mechanism that drains them.[iv]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0Not unlike the paradox of capitalism itself, the reward system of higher education convinces many students to play by rules even as it crushes them.<\/p>\n

The incentives described here run deeper than rubrics and transcripts. They reach into the neural machinery of wanting itself. With so much instruction making students feel badly, what (besides grades) keeps them striving amid diminishing returns?\u00a0\u00a0Recent neuroscience\u00a0suggests that hope of success\u00a0can override\u00a0even repeated disappointment. Something makes the brain keep expecting satisfaction even though it rarely comes.\u00a0Advertisers long have capitalized on the irrational reality that wanting something is far more powerful than getting it.\u00a0The\u00a0expectations associated with\u00a0college are\u00a0part of a\u00a0larger mechanism that influences our wanting. A new\u00a0smart\u00a0phone may give you\u00a0a\u00a0rush, but soon\u00a0there will be\u00a0a\u00a0longing to upgrade,\u00a0buy\u00a0a\u00a0new version,\u00a0make\u00a0another purchase.<\/p>\n

Studies using brain scans show that\u00a0\u201cwanting\u201d and \u201cliking\u201d occur in\u00a0two\u00a0different\u00a0areas\u00a0of the brain and \u201cwanting\u201d\u00a0occurs\u00a0in\u00a0both\u00a0a\u00a0broader\u00a0and\u00a0greater degree than\u00a0\u201cliking.\u201d\u00a0Thus, the\u00a0conventional view\u00a0that\u00a0fundamental appetites\u00a0drive human behavior is not entirely true. The less obvious operations of imagination and\u00a0expectation matter much more than actual experience.\u00a0\u00a0For this reason, anticipation is a bigger animating force than what follows. Researchers believe\u00a0that\u00a0wanting\u00a0impacts everything we do on\u00a0an\u00a0ordinary basis,\u00a0whether it\u2019s buying\u00a0a candy bar or playing a\u00a0computer\u00a0game,\u00a0texting\u00a0a friend or\u00a0seeking\u00a0success.\u00a0Such expectations are so strong\u00a0that\u00a0they make people desire things that offer no benefits. This\u00a0helps\u00a0explain\u00a0the level of\u00a0addictive\u00a0consumption\u00a0in American culture and why\u00a0success\u00a0and\u00a0wealth do not bring\u00a0people long-term meaning.\u00a0It offers insights into\u00a0why people\u00a0eat\u00a0to excess\u00a0or\u00a0develop habits that\u00a0don\u2019t\u00a0bring them enjoyment. Also, this failure to deliver satisfaction is a major cause of Learning on Empty.<\/p>\n

Ultimately,\u00a0anticipation and emotional\u00a0desire can affect\u00a0an individual\u2019s decision-making process when it comes to major\u00a0choices.\u00a0Here again, economists may argue\u00a0that people\u00a0are motivated to do\u00a0well\u00a0at their jobs so they can afford\u00a0to buy things.\u00a0But\u00a0neuroscience\u00a0showsthe\u00a0pursuit\u00a0animates excitement more than compensation.\u00a0Researchers conducted\u00a0a now-classic\u00a0study of how\u00a0one\u00a0part\u00a0of the brain (the nucleus accumbens)\u00a0responds\u00a0to the\u00a0idea\u00a0of\u00a0getting paid. The expectation was that more pay would mean more happiness.\u00a0\u00a0But according to\u00a0Harvard Business Review, \u201cBrain\u00a0activity\u00a0stopped\u00a0at the\u00a0point\u00a0the subjects\u00a0were actually paid,\u00a0implying\u00a0that it was the\u00a0expectation\u00a0and not the\u00a0receipt\u00a0of\u00a0payment\u00a0that\u00a0excited\u00a0them.\u201d[v]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0If people can be\u00a0misled on something so basic,\u00a0what\u00a0else may\u00a0they be\u00a0mistaken about?<\/p>\n

\u201cThe brain seems stingier with mechanisms for pleasure than for desire,\u201d stated Kent Berridge, the scientist primarily known for these findings.[vi]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0Berridge\u2019s\u00a0main finding\u00a0was that the so-called \u201cfeel good\u201d neurotransmitter\u00a0dopamine\u00a0was relatively unimportant\u00a0in\u00a0terms\u00a0of the\u00a0pleasure associated with\u00a0eating sweets or winning a\u00a0contest. Instead,\u00a0Berridge\u00a0located dopamine\u2019s major role in\u00a0the\u00a0anticipation\u00a0of\u00a0pleasure\u00a0(as\u00a0in desires), unconscious\u00a0thought processes, and even the\u00a0memory\u00a0of a\u00a0pleasant\u00a0event.\u00a0Berridge has since found thesepleasure\u00a0systems behind pursuing\u00a0success, the \u201cgood life,\u201d and\u00a0overall\u00a0well-being.\u00a0He concludes\u00a0that true joy\u00a0is more a\u00a0mental\u00a0construction than anything else.\u00a0\u00a0Success\u00a0is a\u00a0function\u00a0of attitude rather than\u00a0absolute\u00a0reality.\u00a0Even more sobering, the powerful\u00a0forces\u00a0of wanting also lie behind anxiety and the\u00a0fear of bad\u00a0outcomes.\u00a0For students caught in this loop, the next reward always promises the satisfaction the last one withheld, and the striving rarely resolves on its own.<\/p>\n

Missing in this dynamic is any\u00a0feeling of being a part\u00a0of\u00a0something bigger than oneself. Such alienation creates\u00a0an\u00a0emotional void\u00a0that\u00a0can only\u00a0be\u00a0filled with more\u00a0work, harder\u00a0studying, or better time management.\u00a0Such gaping emptiness presents an\u00a0opportunity to rethink education. Baruch\u00a0Spinoza\u2019s concept of \u201cconatus\u201d can be helpful here.\u00a0\u00a0Spinoza used conatus to name the striving force in every living being, the drive to persist and to expand one\u2019s own capacities. Learning can constitute that same drive at work, extending the reach of what the striving subject can think, feel, and do.[vii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0In this revised approach, joy can arise from increasing the ability to think or act, just as sorrow can result from decrease. A conatus-informed pedagogy tells students that authentic learning comes not from correct answers or test scores, but from their growth in thinking creatively and connecting with others. To Spinoza the key to learning lies in harnessing the subject\u2019s inherent drive to preserve its own being. When this is done effectively and\u00a0students discover new ideas,\u00a0learning produces a special kind of joy.<\/p>\n

Spinoza\u2019s approach\u00a0also\u00a0sees\u00a0learning\u00a0as a product of\u00a0emotional engagement. Students\u00a0are most successful at learning\u00a0when they feel\u00a0fully accepted and energized to thrive.\u00a0\u00a0Gilles Deleuze and F\u00e9lix Guattari\u00a0further developed\u00a0these ideas\u00a0into a theory of \u201cdesiring-production,\u201d\u00a0with even greater\u00a0pedagogical\u00a0potential.[viii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0Seeing learning as desiring-production\u00a0offers\u00a0a\u00a0compelling\u00a0alternative to the deficit\u00a0approaches so\u00a0common today.\u00a0\u00a0Deleuze and Guattari\u00a0envisioned a flow of\u00a0willful energy\u00a0running through\u00a0all human\u00a0endeavors,\u00a0animated by intrinsic\u00a0desire.\u00a0Circulating\u00a0from\u00a0person-to-person,\u00a0desiring-production can\u00a0animate and\u00a0amplify\u00a0learning. When channeled productively, it offers potentials for students to\u00a0make\u00a0sense of their experiences,\u00a0create links\u00a0between\u00a0concepts, and\u00a0produce\u00a0new\u00a0meanings.<\/p>\n

Individualism is devil in this scheme, as it constrains\u00a0insight\u00a0and\u00a0prevents\u00a0connection. Rather than an inevitable aspect of human nature,\u00a0Deleuze\u00a0and\u00a0Guattari see individualism as a social construct discouraging interconnectedness\u00a0and\u00a0community.\u00a0Their\u00a0concept of \u201cbecoming\u201d\u00a0offers\u00a0a\u00a0direct\u00a0critique\u00a0of the individual in rejecting the premise of a stable, immutable, and independent self. Instead, identity is viewed as fluid, changing, and always connected to the world around it.\u00a0In\u00a0contrast to\u00a0the\u00a0static binary of students as\u00a0either\u00a0capable\u00a0or\u00a0incapable,\u00a0Deleuze\u00a0and\u00a0Guattari see\u00a0learners\u00a0engaged\u00a0in a process of becoming other\u00a0as they evolve toward\u00a0new\u00a0abilities\u00a0and\u00a0potentialities.\u00a0This positive ontology\u00a0begins with what\u00a0each learner brings\u00a0rather than what they lack.<\/p>\n

When a\u00a0student appears\u00a0disengaged the question\u00a0is no longer\u00a0\u201cwhat\u2019s wrong with them?\u201d but rather \u201cwhat forces are blocking their natural\u00a0potential\u00a0for learning?\u201d Psychologist Silvan Tomkins\u00a0developed\u00a0a typology of affects\u00a0identifying\u00a0affect pairs ranging from positive ones like \u201cinterest-excitement\u201d and \u201cenjoyment-joy\u201d to negative ones like \u201cfear-terror\u201d and \u201cshame-humiliation.\u201d[ix]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0As with Spinosa, a\u00a0focus on developing joyful passions\u00a0was\u00a0central in recuperating learner\u00a0attitude\u00a0and\u00a0agency.\u00a0Rather that\u00a0fear or shame\u00a0to drive\u00a0student\u00a0learning, this approach would nurture\u00a0student\u00a0enthusiasm, curiosity, and collaborative engagement.\u00a0Ways to do this\u00a0include creating connections between assignments\u00a0and\u00a0students\u2019 own interests,\u00a0using assessment procedures that encourage\u00a0reflection, and\u00a0fostering\u00a0environments\u00a0where students feel comfortable taking\u00a0risks. The transformative\u00a0potentials of this\u00a0come from\u00a0an understanding of shame in school contexts.\u00a0As in attachment, Tomkins\u00a0attributed\u00a0adult\u00a0shame\u00a0to early experiences of \u201cabsence,\u201d \u201cunmet\u00a0need,\u201d and \u201cdisappointment.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In this reckoning, shame appears\u00a0after a learner has\u00a0felt\u00a0interest\u00a0and\u00a0enjoyment, only to have them\u00a0taken away by a bad outcome.\u00a0\u00a0Such epistemic injury is seen in the subjective harm to students when failure results in something valued and worked for like college.[x]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0As such, it is one more piece in the puzzle of student disengagement.<\/p>\n

The resulting\u00a0motivational ambivalence is a key component of Learning on Empty. And it helps explain why ordinary solutions simply won\u2019t work. By themselves specific methods may provide some help, but they only treat problems from procedural perspectives. They don\u2019t fully address the psychological\/emotional aspects of why students lose traction.\u00a0\u00a0This isn\u2019t to say that all educators should act as therapists. But it does mean making learning less threatening. Creating security is an atmospheric project. It\u2019s a feeling of not expecting punishment for failures or mistakes. Felt security is created through reasonable expectations and opportunities for repair. It comes from productive feedback for growth and improvement, conveyed without judgement. It can be implemented through early low-risk practice experiences to give students confidence before being evaluated. It inheres in structured courses designed with incremental scaffolding to lessen anxiety. Together these steps can generate a relational pedagogy treating students as responsible subjects.<\/p>\n

These intersecting theories point to the powerful affective potential of instruction geared for learner interest and agency.\u00a0By attending to affect educators can transform education from a system of depletion into one replenishing joy, discovery, and collective becoming.[xi]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0Even\u00a0when institutional\u00a0pressure mounts\u00a0and the world\u00a0seems\u00a0an\u00a0uninviting place,\u00a0learners can draw upon curiosity\u00a0and\u00a0connection with others.\u00a0\u00a0Ultimately, affect theory\u00a0provides\u00a0way of\u00a0understanding\u00a0learners\u00a0based on\u00a0possibility.\u00a0\u00a0The\u00a0crisis of engagement that\u00a0definescontemporary education need not continue.\u00a0It is a direct outcome of\u00a0institutional practices\u00a0that limit learner\u00a0desire itself.<\/p>\n

\n

[i]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Sigmund Freud,\u00a0Analysis Terminable and Interminable, in\u00a0The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud,<\/em>\u00a0ed. and trans. James Strachey (London: Hogarth Press, 1957).<\/p>\n

[ii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Jacques Lacan, \u201cThe Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious,\u201d in\u00a0\u00c9crits: The First Complete Edition in English<\/em>, trans. Bruce Fink (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006).<\/p>\n

[iii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0John Bowlby,\u00a0Attachment and Loss,<\/em>\u00a0vol. 1,\u00a0Attachment\u00a0(New York: Basic Books, 1969); Mary D. Salter Ainsworth et al.,\u00a0Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation<\/em>\u00a0(Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1978).<\/p>\n

[iv]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Paulo Freire,\u00a0Pedagogy of the Oppressed<\/em>, trans. Myra Bergman Ramos (New York: Continuum, 1970); Alex J. Armonda,\u00a0A Lacanian Foundation for Critical Pedagogy: In Freire More Than Freire<\/em>\u00a0(London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2025).<\/p>\n

[v]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Gardiner Morse, \u201cDecisions and Desire,\u201d\u00a0Harvard Business Review<\/em>\u00a0(Jan. 2006) https:\/\/hbr.org\/2006\/01\/decisions-and-desire<\/p>\n

[vi]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u201cWhy \u2018Wanting\u2019 and \u2018Liking\u2019 Something Simultaneously is Overwhelming,\u201d University of Michigan (Mar. 3, 2007) https:\/\/news.umich.edu\/why-wanting-and-liking-something-simultaneously-is-overwhelming\/.<\/p>\n

[vii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Baruch Spinoza,\u00a0Ethics<\/em>, trans. by Edwin Curley (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996).<\/p>\n

[viii]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Gilles Deleuze and F\u00e9lix Guattari,\u00a0Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia,\u00a0<\/em>trans.\u00a0Robert Hurley,
\nMark Seem,\u00a0Helen R. Lane\u00a0(Minneapolis: Minnesota, 1983).<\/p>\n

[ix]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Silvan S. Tomkins,\u00a0Affect Imagery Consciousness: The Complete Edition<\/em>\u00a0(New York: Springer Publishing, 2008).<\/p>\n

[x]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Ibid.<\/p>\n

[xi]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Parables for the Virtual.<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In recent years campuses everywhere have been reporting alarming levels of absenteeism and underperformance. It\u2019s certainly something I hear a lot from colleagues at UC Irvine, many of whom are left scratching their heads about exact causes.\u00a0And of course,\u00a0it\u2019s typical to lay the blame on students\u00a0rather than anything relating to instruction or the university itself. … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “Why Students Can’t Simply “Choose” Engagement”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[282,286,104,285,284,124],"class_list":["post-1007","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-affect","tag-affect-theory","tag-college","tag-distraction","tag-engagement","tag-students"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1007","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1007"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1007\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1012,"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1007\/revisions\/1012"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1007"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1007"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1007"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}