Roberts and Mahoney
This article begins discussing technology in our society and how its increase has undeniably affected our classrooms. I agree completely with the discussion and how it highlights the importance of considering educational technology critically, defining its use and purpose. Too often I hear in my practicums, "use technology, it's in the OPR," even though the technology we are suppose to be using is not defined. Is using technology as simple as putting work up on an Elmo or showing students a Schoolhouse Rock video on Youtube? Should we be delving further into the world of technology in our classrooms? The article connects learning through technology to corporatization of schools, which personally, I find a little dramatic. However, it makes a valid point as it works to connect technology and schooling to the larger picture: our society, government, economy, and world.
This article takes a very critical stance on many controversial topics: mandated education laws, common core, and the rise of charter schools over public education. I thought it was very interesting that the article discussed different "educational entrepreneurs" and "opportunistic politicians" as a part of this great system affecting schools today. I think this is one of those things that we all know, one of those things that we're all aware of, but we choose not to discuss it because as unsettling as all this outside influence is, who can really change it? This "corporate reform movement" has so much power in our educational system that when they suggest personal learning technology, our government obliges. The article also brings up valid points about data collection and how this information leads to different systems believing they can "control" what is taking place in schools (the pace, the environment, and the content).
It was disheartening to read the idea that education exists to "train workers for a twenty first century market" because I believe learning and critical thinking goes far beyond that. The idea that we are creating students to fit a mold to go out and fit into a business model of our world is terribly upsetting. What happens when we lose all the free thinkers, the creative minds, and the uninhibited explorers? Our society begins to stand still. Our society becomes a machine and progress all but stops.
I found it really interesting, as this article further discussed the role of teachers in the classroom and how this is changing. I hate the idea proposed, that teachers aren't making decisions in the classroom but are simply managing systems that have control, overseeing the education of students but not really teaching. The assumption that "efficiency" and "effectiveness" is more important than the purpose of education and the idea that everything is a "skill" that can be learned and analyzed and quantified is dangerous.
I'm not going to lie, I usually stay away from reading research and findings similar to what is discussed in this article because it makes me feel helpless. It makes me feel like we've reached the point of no return and that the system now and will always control what teachers once did. I agree with the article, the idea that at our current state, technologies that allow control of school systems do more harm then good. Unfortunately, I'm not sure there are enough people considering this, or taking action for change. I hope in the future things are different, but for now, I feel as if we're a little too stuck.
Coiro
I like the purpose of Coiro's tool, to aid in "exploration of controversial issues on the internet" but also have to wonder if, like Robert and Mahoney's article, this feeds into the idea of giving technology too much control.
I found the four theoretical ideas that drove this design interesting: perspectives on online research, critical thinking in relation to students' understanding, guidance of learning practices, and focus on cognitive capacity. However, there is an underlying idea of control, control that would be given to this new technology if it were created. This study references the idea that student have difficulty with online inquiry, but doesn't consider that online inquiry itself might be the problem. Why do students have to use a computer or search engine to locate information? I remember learning to research in a library, using encyclopedias and textbooks to find information - key word, learning. Students should not be expected to pick up a new form of technology and be able to use it right away. Software to help teach students is valuable, but software that simply control what they can discover, eliminates this 'learning' opportunity. The article's figures provided and images of potential design seem very structured, as if they would allow little choice or informed exploration by students. How does that aid learning? I thought the "Palette of Perspectives" was an interesting concept, but again, wondered if it was controlling and influencing student thought too much.
After reading the article, I had these final thoughts: Why do we need to eliminate complexities for students? Why can't we teach students how to conquer complexities rather than making things simpler?
Couros
I definitely preferred this reading and its concepts to the others, regarding their approaches to technology in schools. First off, I was very surprised by the idea that "30% of children will have a digital footprint before they are born." That sounds absolutely absurd to me! However, the more I think about it, the more realistic it also sounds. Our students will no doubt be dealing with technology for their entire lives, interacting and learning through its operations.
I strongly agree with the idea that student need to be taught how to interact properly in a digital space. There are grand scale issue, like cyber bullying, that must be addressed with students. However, there are also smaller scale issues like sending out emails to professors, co-workers, and potential bosses in proper form, with proper punctuation, free of grammatical errors. Personally, it was my parents always taught me how importance your presence online is and how you should treat technological interaction the same way you treat a face to face conversation. I don't ever remember discussing this in class or in school, which is unfortunate, now that I think back. Teachers should be emphasizing this, and I believe that nowadays they are. I know I plan to.
I found the idea of using technology to reveal issues of power and privilege to be extremely interesting. With all the time students are spending online, they are going to be exposed to these topics anyway - why not take the opportunity to educate them, to form a discussion or debate? If technology is used correctly in the classroom, it can be a great resource. However, one specific thing that Couros' text implied that the others didn't, is the importance of a teacher's role in making decisions about technology in the classroom. The more we educate ourselves, the better we will be at doing this.
Saturday, February 25, 2017
Sunday, February 19, 2017
Reading Response for Class on 2/21
Christensen, Chapter 1
"Break dancing for the tongue" is the phrase Christensen uses to describe poetry. I love this. I also love when she says that "poetry levels the writing playing field." It's a form of writing that allows freedom while engaging all the elements literature is suppose to. Poetry also led itself well to the harder experiences in life. Essays rarely allow students to express the sadness or the joy they feel. Poetry is personal and vulnerable. Christensen states, "I want my student to know they are not alone." Poetry is the tool to help with this.
I thought it was great when Christensen began talking about "awakening" students to the little things in life, to "see daily gifts." This reminded me of a yoga class I took last week, where thee teacher spoke about the process of getting rid of excess so one can really pay attention to the moments in life that seem insignificant but really, hold infinite meaning. I like the idea of using poetic prompts that suggest these ideas: letting the students take a step back and really think about something that might seem small in the grand scene of their life.
I was fascinated when Christensen included the poems that switch between languages. What an incredible way to engage your multi-lingual students, teaching the use of the english language while also supporting their traditional heritage. Christensen shares such wonderful ideas in this chapter, from building a classroom community that allows students to share vulnerable, real experiences to bringing in the outside world to the students' education. She discusses the idea of turning "pain into power" and references the power structures and standards present in our society that can be broken down and analyzed through poetic writing, both of fact and experience.
There are more practical uses to poetry. Christensen mentions highlighting parts of speech and literary elements when teaching a poetry lesson. While I feel as if this shouldn't be the main focus of teaching poetry, I believe that, in putting certain literary elements into a piece of work, students will learn them even easier.
I know I'm biased when it comes to this topic, because I have always had a deep love of poetry. I find it the most effective form of writing to put my thoughts down on a page. I plan to teach it in my classroom one day, and I hope to instill the same connection I feel to the literary form in my students.
"Finding the Poems That Hide"
First off, I love the poem "Forgotten Items" that is included in this post. I often find myself observing scenes and moments in life and feel the sudden urge to write about them, to put them down on paper. I could never quite explain in, but I think post does an excellent job when it states that "poems defy explanation." Poems find a way, through words, to somehow explain what words cannot.
I love how the author of this piece, Macaluso, highlights that poems can alter our world. She touches upon the importance of word choice, or metaphor and symbolism. All these elements are incredibly important in poetry. Sometimes they are thought about, are planned. Sometimes they just spill out.
I know that I will continue writing poems about the everyday moments in life because they help me understand them and let me connect to something that maybe I just can't place at the moment. I hope that others are doing this as well.
"Break dancing for the tongue" is the phrase Christensen uses to describe poetry. I love this. I also love when she says that "poetry levels the writing playing field." It's a form of writing that allows freedom while engaging all the elements literature is suppose to. Poetry also led itself well to the harder experiences in life. Essays rarely allow students to express the sadness or the joy they feel. Poetry is personal and vulnerable. Christensen states, "I want my student to know they are not alone." Poetry is the tool to help with this.
I thought it was great when Christensen began talking about "awakening" students to the little things in life, to "see daily gifts." This reminded me of a yoga class I took last week, where thee teacher spoke about the process of getting rid of excess so one can really pay attention to the moments in life that seem insignificant but really, hold infinite meaning. I like the idea of using poetic prompts that suggest these ideas: letting the students take a step back and really think about something that might seem small in the grand scene of their life.
I was fascinated when Christensen included the poems that switch between languages. What an incredible way to engage your multi-lingual students, teaching the use of the english language while also supporting their traditional heritage. Christensen shares such wonderful ideas in this chapter, from building a classroom community that allows students to share vulnerable, real experiences to bringing in the outside world to the students' education. She discusses the idea of turning "pain into power" and references the power structures and standards present in our society that can be broken down and analyzed through poetic writing, both of fact and experience.
There are more practical uses to poetry. Christensen mentions highlighting parts of speech and literary elements when teaching a poetry lesson. While I feel as if this shouldn't be the main focus of teaching poetry, I believe that, in putting certain literary elements into a piece of work, students will learn them even easier.
I know I'm biased when it comes to this topic, because I have always had a deep love of poetry. I find it the most effective form of writing to put my thoughts down on a page. I plan to teach it in my classroom one day, and I hope to instill the same connection I feel to the literary form in my students.
"Finding the Poems That Hide"
First off, I love the poem "Forgotten Items" that is included in this post. I often find myself observing scenes and moments in life and feel the sudden urge to write about them, to put them down on paper. I could never quite explain in, but I think post does an excellent job when it states that "poems defy explanation." Poems find a way, through words, to somehow explain what words cannot.
I love how the author of this piece, Macaluso, highlights that poems can alter our world. She touches upon the importance of word choice, or metaphor and symbolism. All these elements are incredibly important in poetry. Sometimes they are thought about, are planned. Sometimes they just spill out.
I know that I will continue writing poems about the everyday moments in life because they help me understand them and let me connect to something that maybe I just can't place at the moment. I hope that others are doing this as well.
Saturday, February 11, 2017
Reading Response for Class on 2/14
Happy Valentine's Day everyone!
Emdin, Chapter 5 - Co-Teaching
The anecdote at the beginning of this chapter made me laugh- the teacher pretending to be a student only to reveal himself before the "ten minute rule" was up. This semester I have a professor who is continuously late, and I can't tell you the number of times I've heard my classmates say, "yeah, 15 minutes and I'm gone." I think Emdin makes a valid point, the different circles and communications between students when their teachers are present, when they aren't present, and in general. This is why his "co-teaching" strategy works so well! Students are allowed to communicate the material directly with their peers in their own "social circles." I have used this technique in previous classes and always benefitted. For some reason, it feels more relaxed to be getting information and responding to a peer.
When it comes to co-teaching in a instructional setting, in younger grades (not college) I found myself unsure of the three forms Emdin mentioned. Throughout my middle school and high school careers, I only had a single teacher who lead the class. I don't remember ever being in a class where there was a special education teacher, even though I believe that might be the most effective form of co-teaching. If there were enough resources, that would be incredibly valuable to students, especially students with special needs.
Later in the chapter, when peer-to-peer teaching is discussed, I found myself flashing back to all the students I tutored in high school for National Honors Society volunteer hours. It was always so easy to uncover why a student was struggling with material because I had been there a week ago. I think sometimes teachers struggle to help a student who's 'just not getting it' because they haven't been in that position in some time. Relying on peers to help can change this. Emdin talks about how students are afraid to speak up when they don't understand something in the classroom, but will easily converse with peers about problems. He also discusses students taking charge when they feel the material is not being taught properly. Although this seems like a hard concept to grasp, especially as a future educator, I think that having a student's direct feedback who help me frame the classroom's lesson and in turn, teach the student more effectively.
Christensen, Chapter 2 - Narrative Writing
To start, Christensen makes a great comment about narrative writing, stating it "seems self-indulgent" Students "can spend time reading narratives, but shouldn't spend time writing them." This is a very interesting concept to me. Why are writing and reading valued differently? What makes studying a form of literature any better than writing that form? To me, this seems completely backwards. In my experience, similar to what Christensen states, students enjoy writing and connecting with material that requires them to get personal and bring in their own lives. If they're engaged, they're more likely to learn.
Christensen discusses revision in the chapter and makes a valuable point, explaining that the process, rules, and guidelines must all be discussed prior to actual revision. This is especially true if you're using peer-revision tactics. She also mentions that students care more about their writing when they are presenting it publicly or reading it aloud. This follows something of the peer/coteaching model we saw above in Emdin's chapter, and is very similar to the model we used in class for our "Writing History" papers. I love reading my work aloud, especially narratives, because I get to check in that the voice in my paper matches my own personal voice. I also really enjoy hearing others read aloud. I find myself enthralled in their stories, more engaged than I would have been if I had been reading the words off a paper. Reading aloud brings words to life.
Finally, I found Christensen's mention of the "collective text" interesting. I feel like this is a great way to connect students, to form unity in a classroom, while teaching valuable literary skills. Christensen says, "this activity will help students empathize with each other." This is SO important! In a classroom, you are not only teaching academic skills, but life skills. You are not only making your students better learners, but better people. Connecting the two is, in my opinion, one of the most valuable things a teacher can do.
Gallagher, Chapter 5 - The Power of Choice
Similar to Christensen, Gallagher's chapter focuses on getting students engaged in their writing, putting themselves into the texts they create. However, Gallagher states this is done when choice is given to the students: choice of topics, choice of form, etc.
I really enjoy reading Gallagher's textbook because of the different figures and dialogues she includes. There were many interesting graphic organizers included and examples of how students used them. This reminded me of the FED-ED-ED-CO Graphic Organizer my classmates and I used (and hated) in middle school. Unlike Gallagher's graphic organizers, ours was straight forward, cookie cutter, and very boring. Focus question-evidence-discussion, repeat, and so on until the conclusion. I plan on using much more engaging graphic organizers in my classroom one day.
I thought one of the most intriguing parts of Gallagher's chapter was the "explorations" section because it proposed so many different ways to connect writing to other topics that may be learned in other classes or even outside school. It also brought in the idea that if you have a student struggling with something (loss, bullying, change, etc.) they can explore these concepts through writing. I personally believe this could be incredibly valuable for a student.
Even when Gallagher shifts to the section on partial student choice, there are so many valuable topics and forms presented. I plan to use his strategies frequently in the classroom one day.
Emdin, Chapter 5 - Co-Teaching
The anecdote at the beginning of this chapter made me laugh- the teacher pretending to be a student only to reveal himself before the "ten minute rule" was up. This semester I have a professor who is continuously late, and I can't tell you the number of times I've heard my classmates say, "yeah, 15 minutes and I'm gone." I think Emdin makes a valid point, the different circles and communications between students when their teachers are present, when they aren't present, and in general. This is why his "co-teaching" strategy works so well! Students are allowed to communicate the material directly with their peers in their own "social circles." I have used this technique in previous classes and always benefitted. For some reason, it feels more relaxed to be getting information and responding to a peer.
When it comes to co-teaching in a instructional setting, in younger grades (not college) I found myself unsure of the three forms Emdin mentioned. Throughout my middle school and high school careers, I only had a single teacher who lead the class. I don't remember ever being in a class where there was a special education teacher, even though I believe that might be the most effective form of co-teaching. If there were enough resources, that would be incredibly valuable to students, especially students with special needs.
Later in the chapter, when peer-to-peer teaching is discussed, I found myself flashing back to all the students I tutored in high school for National Honors Society volunteer hours. It was always so easy to uncover why a student was struggling with material because I had been there a week ago. I think sometimes teachers struggle to help a student who's 'just not getting it' because they haven't been in that position in some time. Relying on peers to help can change this. Emdin talks about how students are afraid to speak up when they don't understand something in the classroom, but will easily converse with peers about problems. He also discusses students taking charge when they feel the material is not being taught properly. Although this seems like a hard concept to grasp, especially as a future educator, I think that having a student's direct feedback who help me frame the classroom's lesson and in turn, teach the student more effectively.
Christensen, Chapter 2 - Narrative Writing
To start, Christensen makes a great comment about narrative writing, stating it "seems self-indulgent" Students "can spend time reading narratives, but shouldn't spend time writing them." This is a very interesting concept to me. Why are writing and reading valued differently? What makes studying a form of literature any better than writing that form? To me, this seems completely backwards. In my experience, similar to what Christensen states, students enjoy writing and connecting with material that requires them to get personal and bring in their own lives. If they're engaged, they're more likely to learn.
Christensen discusses revision in the chapter and makes a valuable point, explaining that the process, rules, and guidelines must all be discussed prior to actual revision. This is especially true if you're using peer-revision tactics. She also mentions that students care more about their writing when they are presenting it publicly or reading it aloud. This follows something of the peer/coteaching model we saw above in Emdin's chapter, and is very similar to the model we used in class for our "Writing History" papers. I love reading my work aloud, especially narratives, because I get to check in that the voice in my paper matches my own personal voice. I also really enjoy hearing others read aloud. I find myself enthralled in their stories, more engaged than I would have been if I had been reading the words off a paper. Reading aloud brings words to life.
Finally, I found Christensen's mention of the "collective text" interesting. I feel like this is a great way to connect students, to form unity in a classroom, while teaching valuable literary skills. Christensen says, "this activity will help students empathize with each other." This is SO important! In a classroom, you are not only teaching academic skills, but life skills. You are not only making your students better learners, but better people. Connecting the two is, in my opinion, one of the most valuable things a teacher can do.
Gallagher, Chapter 5 - The Power of Choice
Similar to Christensen, Gallagher's chapter focuses on getting students engaged in their writing, putting themselves into the texts they create. However, Gallagher states this is done when choice is given to the students: choice of topics, choice of form, etc.
I really enjoy reading Gallagher's textbook because of the different figures and dialogues she includes. There were many interesting graphic organizers included and examples of how students used them. This reminded me of the FED-ED-ED-CO Graphic Organizer my classmates and I used (and hated) in middle school. Unlike Gallagher's graphic organizers, ours was straight forward, cookie cutter, and very boring. Focus question-evidence-discussion, repeat, and so on until the conclusion. I plan on using much more engaging graphic organizers in my classroom one day.
I thought one of the most intriguing parts of Gallagher's chapter was the "explorations" section because it proposed so many different ways to connect writing to other topics that may be learned in other classes or even outside school. It also brought in the idea that if you have a student struggling with something (loss, bullying, change, etc.) they can explore these concepts through writing. I personally believe this could be incredibly valuable for a student.
Even when Gallagher shifts to the section on partial student choice, there are so many valuable topics and forms presented. I plan to use his strategies frequently in the classroom one day.
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Reading Response for Class on 2/7
NCTE Standards
I have used these standards before in writing lesson plans for a few of my methods courses, but I noticed something today when I went back and read them again. The words "wide range," "variety," and "diversity" are used numerous times. These standards give teachers plenty of choice for lessons in classroom. I believe that the way they are written really emphasizes learning over testing or results. The standards talk about bigger picture ideas: communicating effectively, gaining greater knowledge of the world and its many cultures, etc. Standard 10 sticks out to me, how it considers students who might not have english as a first language. I LOVE the statement: "make use of their first language to develop competency in the English language." This is so incredibly important! I was in an ELL classroom for tutoring during FNED and I couldn't believe how the teacher simply dismissed the students' native languages. She didn't want them being used in the classroom, didn't want them being spoken at all.
I do believe in emersion. My cousins recently moved from the US to the Netherlands and the youngest, who is four years old, made a friend who was originally from England. He wasn't picking up the Dutch language as quickly as he should because his friend kept speaking to him in English. However, when my aunt and uncle asked her parents to have her speak to him in Dutch, it seemed effortless for him to learn. I think this is what some teachers are going for when they try to restrict a student's use of native language in the classroom, but they often go about it incorrectly. A student should never feel as if their culture or language is lesser than another. They should feel always feel included in the classroom environment.
CCSS Standards
The CCSS Standards are much more specific than the NCTE Standards. Instead of speaking in generalizations, they highlight specific literary techniques and devices the students much master. The CCSS standards also seem to focus on different writings (ie. narrative, informational) and the key ideas within or involving those text types. I feel like the CCSS standards are more helpful in guiding specific lessons while the NCTE standards are broader, helping to guide learning in the classroom and guide the teacher's perspectives on writing and reading.
"Rhode Island Teachers Respond to PARCC: A White Paper"by Janet D. Johnson and Brittany A. Richer
Let's consider "The Problem" - while constantly hearing about the "achievement gap," this is the first time I've been introduced to the "consequence gap." I strongly agree that "a student’s race and socioeconomic status (SES) strongly predicts his or her academic achievement" and that standardized tests like PARCC fail to take this into account. This brings me back to a class discussion we had a few weeks ago where my classmates and I struggled when considering a situation where the reality was that it was the system's fault. I feel as if we are taught to blame everything but the system. Acts are put into place but are constantly failing, with little to no effect. How do we fight a system that gives so little attention to teachers and their opinions for the classroom?
I like that this text discusses teacher perspective. Honestly, if standardized tests considered teacher perspective, there would be no standardized tests, or they would at least look drastically different. I found the survey information collected incredibly telling, from both students and teachers. I never considered the computer/typing aspect of this test until reading the complaints in this text. I remember learning typing in middle school. Before that, I had very little knowledge of computers. To have elementary students first, worrying about a test and second, trying to complete a test when they can't figure out a keyboard, is ridiculous.
Considering PARCC's effect on teaching is critical- and I found this text accurately describes what I would expect. It worries me that teachers feel "powerlessness and deprofessionaliz[ed]" because I know I'll most likely be in that position one day. I do, however, appreciate that this text offers possible solutions that don't seem too wild or far fetched; most stem off simply having more teacher involvement in the bureaucratic process. I think it's important that the conversation on standardized tests continues. I know for me, we took NECAP tests instead of PARCC, so I feel a little unfamiliar with these new tests. I want to prepare myself for the test I'll be administering to my students, which means texts like these are incredibly helpful.
I have used these standards before in writing lesson plans for a few of my methods courses, but I noticed something today when I went back and read them again. The words "wide range," "variety," and "diversity" are used numerous times. These standards give teachers plenty of choice for lessons in classroom. I believe that the way they are written really emphasizes learning over testing or results. The standards talk about bigger picture ideas: communicating effectively, gaining greater knowledge of the world and its many cultures, etc. Standard 10 sticks out to me, how it considers students who might not have english as a first language. I LOVE the statement: "make use of their first language to develop competency in the English language." This is so incredibly important! I was in an ELL classroom for tutoring during FNED and I couldn't believe how the teacher simply dismissed the students' native languages. She didn't want them being used in the classroom, didn't want them being spoken at all.
I do believe in emersion. My cousins recently moved from the US to the Netherlands and the youngest, who is four years old, made a friend who was originally from England. He wasn't picking up the Dutch language as quickly as he should because his friend kept speaking to him in English. However, when my aunt and uncle asked her parents to have her speak to him in Dutch, it seemed effortless for him to learn. I think this is what some teachers are going for when they try to restrict a student's use of native language in the classroom, but they often go about it incorrectly. A student should never feel as if their culture or language is lesser than another. They should feel always feel included in the classroom environment.
CCSS Standards
The CCSS Standards are much more specific than the NCTE Standards. Instead of speaking in generalizations, they highlight specific literary techniques and devices the students much master. The CCSS standards also seem to focus on different writings (ie. narrative, informational) and the key ideas within or involving those text types. I feel like the CCSS standards are more helpful in guiding specific lessons while the NCTE standards are broader, helping to guide learning in the classroom and guide the teacher's perspectives on writing and reading.
"Rhode Island Teachers Respond to PARCC: A White Paper"by Janet D. Johnson and Brittany A. Richer
Let's consider "The Problem" - while constantly hearing about the "achievement gap," this is the first time I've been introduced to the "consequence gap." I strongly agree that "a student’s race and socioeconomic status (SES) strongly predicts his or her academic achievement" and that standardized tests like PARCC fail to take this into account. This brings me back to a class discussion we had a few weeks ago where my classmates and I struggled when considering a situation where the reality was that it was the system's fault. I feel as if we are taught to blame everything but the system. Acts are put into place but are constantly failing, with little to no effect. How do we fight a system that gives so little attention to teachers and their opinions for the classroom?
I like that this text discusses teacher perspective. Honestly, if standardized tests considered teacher perspective, there would be no standardized tests, or they would at least look drastically different. I found the survey information collected incredibly telling, from both students and teachers. I never considered the computer/typing aspect of this test until reading the complaints in this text. I remember learning typing in middle school. Before that, I had very little knowledge of computers. To have elementary students first, worrying about a test and second, trying to complete a test when they can't figure out a keyboard, is ridiculous.
Considering PARCC's effect on teaching is critical- and I found this text accurately describes what I would expect. It worries me that teachers feel "powerlessness and deprofessionaliz[ed]" because I know I'll most likely be in that position one day. I do, however, appreciate that this text offers possible solutions that don't seem too wild or far fetched; most stem off simply having more teacher involvement in the bureaucratic process. I think it's important that the conversation on standardized tests continues. I know for me, we took NECAP tests instead of PARCC, so I feel a little unfamiliar with these new tests. I want to prepare myself for the test I'll be administering to my students, which means texts like these are incredibly helpful.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)