Entry #11: This Is The End *cues Adele's "Skyfall"*

Reflections on Content

We dove deeper into a variety of topics within literacy development this semester, and these are just a few that stood out. 

Phonics

Something I didn't mention earlier: going into this class, I hated phonics. Or rather, I hated phonetics, and most everything it touched.

As I've mentioned, I was a linguistics major in undergrad. In my foundational linguistics course, we had a unit on phonetics and phonology, which makes sense because it's a foundational part of linguistics. 

I struggled so much with that unit. 

I had such a hard time hearing the differences between the phonemes and figuring out which ones were being used in words. I had to go in for extra help with my professor, and still, I didn't feel like I understood what was happening. I was flying by the seat of my pants, and it was terrible. 

I don't know how to say this without sounding annoying, but I think it left such a bad impression in my mind because it was the first time in school that something didn't come easily. I've worked hard in school my whole life, of course, but most of the time, nothing was particularly difficult. If I struggled, it was never for a long time. Phonetics was different. I just couldn't get it. And so I hated it. (I know: that's not a great growth mindset...)

Now, by a series of events that had to do with a professor I adored and lack of judgment by me, I ended up in a class about pronunciation (which dealt with phonetics and phonics) and a semester long research elective about pronunciation (like I said, lack of judgment by me). While I actually really enjoyed the pronunciation class and actually felt semi-smart by the time I finished my research project, I still had my knee-jerk hatred of phonetics and by extension, phonics. I understood what I was talking about (mostly), but it just felt hard.

So when I saw that phonics was going to be one of the deeper dives, I tried to wrangle my enthusiasm.  

It didn't really work.

I just had this sense of dread that phonics was so essential to the reading process - that it was the reading process (even though I knew objectively this wasn't true) - and I wasn't going to be able to understand how to do anything with it. 

But phonics turned out to have a lot of things that intrigued me. Phonics isn't the be all, end all of reading, and it doesn't have to be this complex thing to teach students. You aren't trying to isolate sounds like I was doing in undergrad, and you don't need to remember all the IPA vowel symbols, which I still can't. Through the article we read on phonics, "Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask)" (Stahl et al., 1998), I was able to see the principles you need for phonics instruction. And they weren't scary. And as the article said, "Although phonics instruction is an extremely important part of beginning reading, it is only one part" (Stahl et al., 1998, p. 344). There are other important aspect; everything isn't just phonics all the time. 

Spelling

As we've established, I can't spell. (Tangent (I know, I do a lot of these; my brain is a mess): I literally had a dream the other night where I was trying to convince someone that spelling wouldn't matter in the future, and I'm convinced it was prompted by that blog post I wrote. *clears throat* Anyway.) 

I thought spelling was spelling tests and spelling bees. That's it. That's how you dealt with spelling. I had spelling tests all through elementary school (lot of good it did me), and we all had to try for the spelling bee in middle school (none of us got very far), and that's what I thought spelling was in school.

But through Tompkins (2017) and Stahl et al. (1998), I learned about inventive spelling (now: phonetic spelling). And I love it. It is great way way to literally see students' understanding of phonics. Their graphophonemic awareness is on display for the teacher in a way that most concepts can't be displayed. 

So spelling isn't just spelling tests and bees. It is phonics and word patterns and affixes and root words and more than anything, trial and error. 

Fluency

I knew about fluency in the context of speaking. I knew how to build students' second language speaking fluency through activities such as 4/3/2 (I even wrote a paper about it!). I knew fluency was important.

But I had no idea what it consisted of in reading and especially not in writing. 

Tompkins' (2017) chapter and Rasinski's (2014) article, "Fluency matters," were eye-opening. There were components of fluency! There were things you could do to improve fluency in reading and writing! I even recognized tests that I had taken as a kid that were measures of fluency! 

It made sense. You needed automaticity in reading and writing. You needed speed, to a certain extent, in reading and writing. You needed prosody in reading or voice in writing. These were clear, easy to understand things to look for in students. I even used this knowledge in another class in making a reading intervention plan: fluency instruction seemed like the thing that would make the most impact on the student's reading. 

Reflections on the Blog

I think we've established that I don't have the best track record of slowing down and connecting to readings (as noted here and here). Having to write a blog post after reading, though, made me connect and actually consider what I thought about what I read. And unlike other formats, where I am hyper-concerned with citations and formatting and perfect language, I could just write what I thought in the blog. It allowed for deeper connections - because a lot of times I don't write about certain things for classes because I don't consider it "academic-y" enough. I don't think like "an academic"; I think like a snarky 21 year old because that's what I am. It was a nice change to be authentic in what I wrote because I'm often ... not ... in writing for school. But I could be in this, and my experiences that I normally wouldn't write about were just as valuable in considering literacy development, if not more so. I could consider what I've gone through and then honestly talk about what I would do in the classroom. 

Classrooms, like life, aren't nice, neat theoreticals. They are messy, and this writing format helped work through that.

References

Rasinksi, T. (2014). Fluency matters. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 3-12. 

Stahl, S.A., Duffy-Hester, A.M., & Stahl, K.A.D. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 338-355. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.33.3.5

Tompkins, G.E. (2017).  Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

(If this is a little ramble-y at times, I just want to say my new (or relatively new) meds are messing with my head just a *little* bit... I tried waiting until my head was a little more clear, but it doesn't seem to be clearing up. Just to be completely upfront here.)

Entry #10: I Got Nostalgic For My Elementary School, So This Is Longer Than Normal...

The notion of not liking ELA, and reading especially, was completely foreign to me when I was in elementary school. Reading was fun, and everyone did it. At home, my mom and oldest sister Megan were always reading books for fun, and Emily, my other sister, would often read magazines or stuff on the internet. Friday nights were reading nights (when we got to read during dinnertime) at our house, as well as any night when my dad didn't make it home for dinner (yes, we ate dinner together every night - we were that type of family). We did word puzzles (I remember having rebus puzzle books and doing the Jumble in the newspaper) and got pretty competitive with them. Even our presents at Christmastime involved us having to solve puzzles and riddles to get to them (still do, in fact). At school, we had independent reading time all the time (called DEAR time when we were in the lower grades for "drop everything and read"), and we always got to pick whatever books we wanted to read. ELA classes were enjoyable because we did things like have readers' theaters, hold themed events related to the books we read (like a pioneer day when reading "Sarah, Plain and Tall"), write stories where we had lots of creative freedom, and play word games. 

(This weird tangent has a point, I swear.)

Like I said, not liking reading just wasn't a thing when I was in elementary school. Nobody I knew (as far as I could tell) didn't like to read. 

And then came middle school. And I got it then, why someone could dislike ELA. 

Particularly, learning vocabulary.

Like all my fellow high-achieving nerd friends in middle school, I took an SAT prep vocabulary class during homeroom. I liked vocabulary. I remember doing vocabulary flashcards at dinner as a kid with my older sisters. I used to make my own flashcards with unfamiliar words from books I read. Learning words was fun. 

That vocabulary class sucked the fun out of everything. Have you ever read a "novel" that force-feeds you vocabulary? Because that's what we did. I have managed to block out most of my experience with "The Marino Mission: One Girl, One Mission, One Thousand Words: 1,000 Need-To-Know SAT Vocabulary Words," but clearly, it still lingers in my consciousness. 

All of this came back to me when I read Meaghan's post, "Vocabulary Development Can Be Fun?". Meaghan made a lot of important points in her post, and I'm going to be spending my time blessing them and sharing my own thoughts.

First, Meaghan writes, 

"The idea that students can be learning, while also having fun, is such an important lesson for even myself to acknowledge. I think a lot of elementary and even middle school curriculums have this as a missing piece. The enthusiasm for learning is so crucial in order to reach kids, and keep them engaged, wanting to learn more" (Jackson, 2022). 

Fun truly is too often missing from learning. I was blessed to have an elementary school that made learning enjoyable (I won't say I want to go back to those days, but I definitely want to go back to those days...). I think too many schools and teachers think you can do one or the other; you can have fun, or you can learn - you can't do both. I know that's not true because I had so much fun, and I learned so much in elementary school. My school definitely made us all believe reading was fun. Our teachers read aloud books all through elementary school. (I do really mean all the way through elementary school. My 5th grade teacher read aloud "The Hunger Games" to us. We didn't have to do any assignments with it. It was just for pleasure because our teacher knew it was about to be made into a movie that most of us wanted to see.) We looked forward to DEAR time because we could read whatever, no judgments or policing our books. If you wanted to read a picture book about something science-y, great. If you wanted to read that year's Golden Sowers, awesome. As long as you were reading and enjoying it, it didn't matter. The weekly trips to the library were looked forward to by all of us. It was an environment that fostered joy. 

When I compare that to that vocabulary class, where reading was a chore, I feel so much luckier about what I had. I know my experience was an exception. But it shouldn't be. We were open to learning because we knew it was fun. So many students who struggle in the school environment, and I can't help but think that they wouldn't struggle as much if joy was considered an essential part of the curriculum. Gholdy Muhammad (2020) puts it beautifully:

"We should want to move beyond mere grades and test scores and make it our mission that when students leave our teachers and our schools, they not only earn strong grades and test scores, but they also embody a love and joy for reading and literacy - that they leave us and ascend to remote regions of the world while also discovering the power of their minds" (p. 169). 

Meaghan ties this love of reading into vocabulary learning in particular. She writes,

"If children are engaged in what they are reading, find joy in it, and excited to learn about new vocabulary words they may come across because of that joy, I think that is success. Reading is essential in vocabulary growth, especially in the younger grades, [sic] therefore, the more time children spend reading (and enjoying what they are reading), the more successful they will be in reading comprehension and beyond" (Jackson, 2022).

This notion is backed by Tompkins (2017) at multiple points throughout the text. First, she backs the importance of reading in vocabulary growth, sharing that "reading is the single largest source of vocabulary growth in students, especially after third grade" (p. 243). That is huge. More than explicit instruction, reading is how students learn vocabulary. Clearly, then, you want to students to want to read. And as Meaghan wrote and Tompkins (2017) confirms, 

"Vocabulary knowledge and reading achievement are closely related: Students with larger vocabularies are more capable readers, and they know more strategies for figuring out the meanings of unfamiliar words than less capable readers do ... Capable readers get better because they read more, and the books they read are more challenging with academic vocabulary words" (p. 220).

It is all connected. Joy, reading, vocabulary development, and reading comprehension.

The goal then? Making the idea of disliking reading foreign to everyone.

References

Jackson, M. (2022). Entry #9: Vocabulary development could be fun? Jackson LTED601 Literacy Blog. https://jacksonlted601literacy.blogspot.com/2022/04/entry-9-vocabulary-development-can-be.html. 

Muhammad, G. (2020). Cultivating genius: An equity framework for culturally and historically responsive literacy. New York, NY: Scholastic.

Tompkins, G.E. (2017).  Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. 

 

Entry #9: My Nerdiness Has An Application!

Not surprisingly since I helped pick it, this week's article was one that really interested me. I have a fascination with ambiguous language. It's a bit funny, actually, because I haven't always been the best at recognizing or understanding it (still not great at it...). I'm not exaggerating (though I wish I were) when I say it took me until high school before I understood the "seven ate nine" joke because I couldn't see the other meaning of "eight." I could have told you "eight" and "ate" were homophones but could not make the connection in that context at all.

I think, though, my fascination with ambiguous language started in my undergraduate when I learned about garden path sentences in the context of understanding syntax. Garden path sentences are those that start in a way that lets you to believe it will be one thing, but if you read it that way, it is ungrammatical. One of the ones I remember learning was, "The old man the boat." When you initially read it, you think the noun phrase is "the old man," but if it was read like that, it wouldn't be a grammatical sentences. Instead, the subject is "the old" and the predicate is "man the boat." I took an entire course on syntax (and loved it), and my favorite sentences to diagram were garden path sentences and sentences that had more than one meaning. (Though I did like doing grammatically complex sentences too... Tree diagrams are just fun.) 

Grammatically incorrect first guess

Grammatically correct garden path sentence

However, even as I loved these sentences in syntax class, I couldn't see how they were relevant to the real world. When would you intentionally use these types of sentences? When are the old going to man the boat? Which brings me to now. In the article, Zipke (2008) helped me see how humor uses ambiguous language all the time, and in the textbook, Tompkins (2017) showed how common ambiguous words actually were. (My jaw almost dropped when I saw the list of common words that had five or more meanings. No wonder it is so hard to learn languages!)

For people who don't think humor is worthwhile, I think about an interview I did with an ENL teacher during my undergraduate when she said that the best moment in teaching was when an EL made their first joke in English. Being about to manipulate language and form an identity in English are powerful things. When you can make a joke in a new language, you are able to show who you are, to be yourself. By teaching ambiguous language, I'd be helping my students build their identity. That is something we are constantly talking about in our group discussions; students should be able to know and be who they are in my classroom. 

Plus, it's just fun. Sometimes, language skills are quite boring. It's hard to make grammar rules or parts of speech exciting. Homonyms and ambiguity, however, are fun. I spent this past weekend with my aunt and uncle, and my uncle kept regaling us with dad jokes. Every single one of them manipulated language using lexical and structural ambiguity. 

I ended up using Zipke's (2008) article to create a unit plan in another class. I thought it would be difficult to come up with four lessons using riddles as the focus, but I had no difficulties coming up with content. From looking at homophones and homonyms to dissecting riddles using the 3W chart to looking at books that use ambiguous language to writing and performing riddles, the unit plan probably could have been longer. It just really made me see how prevalent - and powerful - ambiguity is. 

References

Tompkins, G.E. (2017).  Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Zipke, M. (2008). Teaching metalinguistic awareness and reading comprehension with riddles. The Reading Teacher, 62(2), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.62.2.4

Entry #8: /fɑː.nɪks wɪð frendz/ feat. Chloe Patterson

This post will be in response to Chloe Patterson's excellent post on phonics! I will be looking at the incorporation of what she discussed in the classroom in regard to worksheets, connected texts, and supporting below grade level learners.

Bless

Cheering Chloe on for her post!

Chloe did a great job of connecting what we learned last week to her future classroom. I especially loved how she included diverse, connected texts that she would stock in her class library - I always love seeing book recommendations for students! It was clear from her post that she knew what she was talking about.

Address

One of the questions I had for Chloe - and Tompkins and the authors of the article - was about the use of worksheets. I completely agree that worksheets by themselves are an ineffective way to teach phonics; Stahl et al. (1998) said that "the amount of time students spent on worksheets did not relate to gains in reading achievement" (p. 33), and I am not disputing that in any way. 

Isn't offering as many means to understand information what it's all about?

However, if they were to be coupled with direct instruction - if students were to fill them out as a class while doing the activities mentioned - would they be a meaningful reinforcement? What I like about worksheets is the chance to see the written representation of what has been discussed; if students are simultaneously seeing a word or spelling pattern and hearing the teacher say it, wouldn't that be useful, especially at the third grade level? Plus, they would then have a physical reminder of what they learned that they could refer to. 

Press

I have two areas I want to press on to see if Chloe could expand. The first has to do with the books she selected. I was not familiar with any of the books (though upon looking them up, they look very cute). I would love to know: how did she discover these books? How did she decide they were good books to use in her classroom? How would she classify them using Bishop's models that we learned in Möller (2016)? What topics would she link with them? What phonics related instruction would she pair with each of them? 

Chloe, because I'm sure she already has thought about all this!

The next has to do with something Chloe mentioned in the last paragraph. She discussed that she would use the activities to help students with below grade level phonics skills - I would love to know how she would use the activities. Would she pull the students for one-on-one intervention? Would she embed support into whole group lessons, thereby reviewing it for other students? How would she ensure they are getting as much reading time as other students despite their difficulties with phonics? Which activities would she prioritize? Since many third graders would still be working on learning some digraphs and diphthongs (Tompkins, 2017), how would she ensure students are catching up to grade level and learning the new phonics material with their classmates?

References

Möller, K.J., (2016). Using diverse classroom literature collections using Rudine Sims Bishop’s conceptual metaphors and analytical frameworks as guides. Journal of Children’s Literature, 42(2), 64-74.

Stahl, S.A., Duffy-Hester, A.M., & Stahl, K.A.D. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 338-355. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.33.3.5

Tompkins, G.E. (2017). Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Entry #7: Confession - I Can't Spell

Before these readings, I had never heard the term "invented spelling" (Tompkins, 2017, p. 170). The concept didn't seem all that radical, so I was a bit surprised - and then not surprised - at the controversy surrounding it. 

(Why was I then not surprised? Because we love to make everything controversial.)

Invented spelling, as described by Stahl et al. (1998), is when "children invent their own spellings in their writings, using what they know about letters and sounds" (p. 343). Basically, children spell as best they can with what they already know, rather than using dictation or memorization to spell words. The teacher doesn't correct the spellings, as it is more about developing phonics (in relation to spelling) than perfection.

By using invented spelling, children develop better phonemic and graphophonemic awareness, as long as they are also receiving spelling instruction. As they receive instruction and their awareness increase, their invented spellings become more conventional. Spelling also improves through increased time spent reading and writing - exposure and practice are always important factors in learning, in my opinion.

So what's the big deal about this? Well, many think that students are developing bad spelling habits (Tompkins, 2017) or do not learn how to spell conventionally (Stahl et al., 1998). 

And I get it. It looks like that. The spelling is going to be riddled with errors as they are learning. But isn't that just learning? We do it wrong until we learn the skills necessary to do it right. Isn't it better that they are practicing how to do it themselves and understand why things are the way they are rather than just being told what to do? I'd much rather have students practice invented spelling and spell something phonetically - where I can see they understand the connection between sounds and letters - than have them used memorized words or have it dictated to them. You know what you learn when someone does things for you? Practically nothing. 

Furthermore, if we can make sense out of what they are writing, does it really matter all that much? I think the content of what they are writing is more important than the conventions. And with the rise of technology, I feel like the need for perfect spelling is diminishing. I think I've misspelled about an eighth of the words I wrote for this post (including the word misspelled!), and you can't tell at all. It's gotten to the point that the only times I am physically writing is when I am taking notes for myself (in which case, only I have to understand what is written) and when I am writing letters to my friend in Germany (and half the time I type out my letters before I write them because I want to get my thoughts organized beforehand). 

I'm not saying spelling is unimportant. I think it is more important, though, for students to figure it out for themselves. We teach the skills they need - word patterns, affixes, roots, things like that - and how to proofread well, but we shouldn't worry all that much. It is something that will develop through exposure and practice.

And if it doesn't? That's what spellcheck is for.

References

Stahl, S.A., Duffy-Hester, A.M., & Stahl, K.A.D. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 338-355. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.33.3.5

Tompkins, G.E. (2017).  Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Entry #6: No Blank Slates In This Classroom

This week, there was something that Tompkins (2017) said that I thought applied to the education field as a whole:

"Literacy development has been broadened to incorporate the cultural and social aspects of language learning, and children's experiences with and understandings about written language - both reading and writing - are included as part of emergent literacy" (p. 111). 

Let me explain because I'm not talking about emergent literacy being applied to all of education. I am talking about the idea of widening the lens through which educators view students' skills and experiences. It seems like a common theme in education; the best practices now involve looking at the child more holistically, at everything they bring to the table, rather than just very specific features that have traditionally been valued. 

What came to mind first had to do, of course, with English language learners. In my other literacy class, in our section on getting to know our students, I read this great article by Moll et al. (1992). Moll et al. (1992) switched their mindset from what their students couldn't do to what their students could do. They learned about their students and saw that they had rich cultural knowledge, diverse experiences, and practical skillsets that just weren't appreciated by the traditional American school setting. They called what these students had "funds of knowledge," defined formally as "historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for household or individual functioning and well-being" (Moll et al., 1992, p. 133). These funds of knowledge were then consulted to design lessons that were engaging and related to students' lives. Clearly, this is an example of broadening to incorporate cultural and social backgrounds of students in education.

Similar to Moll et al. (1992), DeCaupa and Marshal (2011) focused on students' (particularly SIFEs' (students with interrupted formal education)) experiences and strengths. They developed the mutually adaptive learning paradigm (MALP), based on the collectivist culture of education found in many of the societies SIFEs come from. DeCaupa and Marshal (2011) describe it as such:

"in MALP-driven instruction, the teacher acknowledges and uses what the [SIFE] bring with them but also provide pathways to new and different aspects of learning that their students will need in order to achieve academic success" (2011, p. 40).  

This approach values what students can already do and uses what they can do to develop their skills further. 

I can also see this idea in Muhammad's (2020) Historically Responsive Literacy (HRL) Framework. I mean, Muhammad (2020) literally has "identity" as a dimension of HRL. It is clear that she values incorporating individual and cultural experiences into the literacy development process. 

Even the Innovation Configuration (IC) allows students to connect their personal lives into the literacy experience. One of the goals for comprehension development with the IC is for students to make "text-to-self connections to characters, setting, or story events" (Beauchat et al., 2009, p. 30). Text-to-self questions allow for students to make meaning of a story by using what they already know. 

I can see this holistic, broad-lens approach in our class as well. We are constantly using and sharing our diverse literacy experiences through both discussions and our literacy autobiography. We didn't all come to this class with the same experiences - far from it. But all of our experiences bring something important to the table that allow us to see different perspectives that make us grow as both an educator and a person. 

No student comes to us a blank slate. Rather than seeing the deficits, I want to rejoice in the valuable and diverse experiences that can enrich the classroom and support learning. 

And of course, this sounds all fine and good, but it will take some real work to shift our thinking (at least, I know it will be for me). It is so easy to see what students can't do, especially in the ENL world, where students might come with no English and no written literacy in their home language. How can I work to change the narrative in my classroom so that everyone can see all that they can do?

References

Beauchat, K. A., Blamey, K. L., & Walpole, S. (2009). Building preschool children's language and literacy one storybook at a time. The Reading Teacher, 63(1), 26–39.

DeCapua, A., & Marshall, H. W. (2011). Reaching ELLs at risk: Instruction for students with limited or interrupted formal education. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(1), 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10459880903291680 

Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., and Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of Knowledge for Teaching Using a Qualitative Approach to Connect Home and School. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132-141

Muhammad, G. (2020). Cultivating genius: An equity framework for culturally and historically responsive literacy. New York, NY: Scholastic.

Tompkins, G.E. (2017).  Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Entry #5: ~Woah, We're Halfway There~

Dear Dr. Jones,

I'll admit, I did not have high hopes for this semester. I'm in two literacy courses right now - this one and one for TESOL - and I was afraid it would be much of the same content, as the descriptions for the classes were strikingly similar. 

Luckily, my worries were for naught. While certain themes and ideas have been covered in both classes, the instruction and lens of focus have been very different. Furthermore, my concerns that this would be a class on how to teach phonics and word recognition and such were squashed the first night. The holistic approach to reading used in this class is one that seems approachable to me and much more enjoyable and inclusive. Everything we've covered has been useful for building a literacy toolkit for educators.

I didn't imagine we'd be doing as much reflection on our own experiences as we have. It's been a bit difficult, since my memory is fairly poor and I don't actually remember much of my childhood or adolescence - just snippets of random events. It's given me an excuse to call my mother a lot, though, and ask to hear all about my literary upbringing. 

In addition to past experiences, I've also had to reflect on my current habits. 

Ah, my current habits.

As I've mentioned, I'm a power reader, pushing through textbooks and articles to get what I need and be done with it. I rarely try to connect with academic texts any more than I must to do my work. I know that this isn't the best way, but since I've had hundreds of pages to read every week for classes basically since I started undergrad, I've prioritized speed over all else. Upon starting college, I quickly dropped my habits of note taking and vocabulary cards and relied on my (admittedly poor) memory. And since it worked well enough, I kept to that since it saved me time. The same goes for writing. I plan in my head, write my draft - revising as I go - and then let someone else read it over for clarity before calling it good and turning it in. I rarely read my own work once my draft is finished since I've been editing and revising throughout, and I'm usually sick of my own words and thoughts at that point. 

Are these good habits? Of course not. I know that. I would be horrified if my students did the things I did. Each week as we read these articles (which I have slowed down to read and sticky note to death (I have literally run out of sticky notes in my apartment because of this class)), I note all these good strategies and how few of them I normally do. It makes me wonder how much I have missed by not connecting more with the text.

Okay, so now to Liz Kleinrock. Can I just say, I loved that presentation? She seems amazing. She made ABAR education seem doable without guilting us for not already doing it. In fact, she was so kind and conscious of the current struggles in education that it made it feel okay, no matter what amount of ABAR education we were incorporating into our work. We need to take care of ourselves, our students, and then worry about the rest. 

Combined with what we learned in class, the presentation made it clear that it's important for us to use books that promote ABAR, use practices that support the tenants of HRL for the good of all students, and be open with caregivers and colleagues what we are doing and how they can support our work. The focus of ABAR is pretty aligned with HRL, something we've been focusing on in class. 

Finally (I didn't really have a good transition to this one), the struggles I'm having with the class right now are honestly more related to my personal life and health issues affecting my motivation and ability to get work done. For this, I just need to continue to focus on taking care of myself, being patient, doing what I can when I'm feeling up to it, and trying to give myself grace. There is unfortunately not much else that can be done. 

Sincerely,

Sarah