My daughter is seven years old. We have been reading the Gospel Principles manual for a while now. Today, after reading the first part of Chapter 16: The Church of Jesus Christ in Former Times, there was a question to answer. Why does the Church of Jesus Christ need these six features? (Those features are, Revelation, Authority from God, the Church Organization, First Principles and Ordinances, Ordinances Performed for the Dead, and Spiritual Gifts.)

This was her answer:

Without spiritual gifts you would’t be able to have visions, prophesy, or perform miracles. Everything gets out of order without the Holy Ghost.

Without the Holy Ghost we wouldn’t know what to do. The Holy Ghost is the Spirit and you can’t have Spiritual gifts wihout the Holy Ghost.

If we never taught the spirits of the dead they’d never hear the Gospel and never get to accept the Gospel. How can you accept something you don’t know about? That’d be a little silly. It wouldn’t make sense.

If we didn’t have authority from God we wouldn’t have revelation or the church organization. It would be like we had nothing, no church.

(edit: here’s the link to the lesson we read: LDS.org – Sunday School Chapter Detail – The Church of Jesus Christ in Former Times)

My name is Hazel Davidson and I was asked to give a talk about Jesus Christ always obeying Heavenly Father.

Jesus Christ always obeyed Heavenly Father, by following the “My Gospel Standards.”

Jesus remembered his baptismal covenants and listened to the Holy Ghost.

Jesus was honest with Heavenly Father, others, and himself.

He sought good friends and treated others kindly.

He dressed modestly to show respect for Heavenly Father and himself.

He only read things that were pleasing to Heavenly Father.

Jesus also only watched things that were pleasing to Heavenly Father. For example, even though there was
no TV, he did NOT stand by and watch a woman get stoned for her mistakes.

Jesus listened to music that was pleasing to Heavenly Father.

He used the name of Heavenly Father reverently and did not swear or use crude words.

He kept his mind and body sacred and pure, and did not eat or drink things that were harmful to him.

Jesus did those things on the Sabbath that helped him feel close to Heavenly Father.

He chose the right.

Jesus was worthy to go to the temple and served a mission the last few years of his life. He followed Heavenly Father’s plan for him, by becoming our Savior.

He was a child of God, just like us.

He knew Heavenly Father loved him, and Jesus loved Heavenly Father.

He prayed to Heavenly Father anytime, anywhere.

I had a personal experience, that I feel bad when I don’t follow Heavenly Father, but I know I can work hard and repent when I make a mistake. I am trying to follow Jesus.

I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Note: The “My Gospel Standards” used was the 1997 version found here (scroll down a bit. We didn’t notice there was a change. The current one can be found here.

Also, the hints need help. One question was, what’s 900 times 70. My daughter used the hint button which simply told her the shortcut way of how to do the problem. Ignore the zeros and then add them at the end of whatever 9 times 7 is. Not cool. My daughter had no idea why this short cut worked. I did a math exercise with her to help her see the pattern in order for her to understand why it worked. Other Leapster mathematical games gave visual representations along with the hints, and did not do short cuts. For a company that advertises learning games, they need to step up and follow current studies which show that students need to understand the fundamentals, and the long way of doing math, before they can understand the short cuts of math, with the use of as many visual aids and hands on activities as possible.

Hence I am rather disappointed with this game.
The only reason why it did not get a lower than a three out of five is that my daughter is still having fun with the game.

Summary of Literary Review

There are two opposing viewpoints on how to properly instruct children in the classroom. There is the teacher-centered approach where the role of the teacher is to dispense facts and the role of the student is to listen and memorize said facts. In the child-centered, or constructivist, approach the children are more in control of their education. They do hands on activities to promote a higher order of thinking (analysis, critical thinking), and projects are usually branched off from the main topic of discussion. Critics of the child-centered approach say that children waste too much time with such activities and would be better served learning mathematics facts and physics. Advocates of the child-centered approach say that allowing children to make discoveries of their own is vital to obtaining a higher order of thinking which better serves children throughout their lives. Supporters also assert that in most classrooms there is simply only the occasional child-centered activity but that classrooms have largely remained teacher-centered (Abbeduto, 2006).

Summary of Yes Position

Teachers needs to rethink their role as teachers. Is a teacher simply the dispenser of information or is a teacher the facilitator of learning? Windschitl states that current teachers simply copy the teachers they had had as children which hinders the goal of going beyond the teacher-centered method of rote memorization to learning. He says that therein lies the problem of creating a truly constructivist classroom. Educators are married to the current norms of curriculum and standardization. A part of the issue may lie in the greater depth of knowledge teachers will need to have in the topics that they teach. Windschitl uses the concept of density as an example. In a constructivist classroom there would be different groups of students tackling the issue of density using a variety of methods. One group may take a purely mathematical approach while another may use the story of the Titanic. The teacher would need to have an understanding of the mathematical concepts with density as well as the complexity of the issue as illustrated in the sinking of the Titanic. Once a teacher reconciles this issue the hands on, child-centered, approach will lead children to be more engaged in the topic being studied and allows them to learn how to think critically and analytically, as well as learning problem solving skills. Windschitl believes that the constructivist approach can be reconciled with state standards. He also states that teachers needs to have a firm understanding of why they are using the constructivist approach instead of the widely accepted teacher-centered approach, since it is inevitable that someone would ask them why they run their classroom the way they do. Assessments will need to be made of each child’s progress using journals, reports, and other projects that demonstrate the student’s understanding of the topic being studied which will aid in determining whether or not the class is meeting the standards of education. To aid teachers in giving children the best education possible school administrators need to be supportive in the “less is more” concept, encourage teacher collaboration, and school wide changes such as block scheduling. (Windschitl, 1999).

Summary of No Position

Hirsch sets out to debunk the constructivist approach through research comparing ineffective American classrooms and effective Asian classrooms. He states that classrooms that are filled with projects where children are responsible for their own learning did not perform as well as children in teacher-centered approached classrooms, where there was more focus and time allotted to learn a subject. Hirsch asserts that there is importance in drill and practice which helps children retain the information being learned, following the adage of “use it or lose it”, and that the constructivist approach does not offer enough in the way of drill and practice thereby cheating the students out of retaining information. He also argues that breadth is more important than depth. Students need to learn as much as they can about various subjects because by the time a child is in college the focus of study narrows. Hirsch also asserts that the policy of “best practices” by organizations such as the National Association for the Education of Young Children, is not founded upon research but upon pedagogical romanticism. Children learn best by the teacher introducing new material in small increments and by having the teacher make connections to previously learned topics that relate to the new material. Whole class instruction should dominate in the classroom, and students should be given challenging work to keep their interest. Hirsch states that children in classrooms with whole class instruction and a focused schedule are more motivated and interested in the subjects being taught than children in classrooms that are filled with workshops and projects. Teachers that exude warmth as well as a businesslike air have more successful classrooms than teachers that exude warmth but are more concerned about a child’s self esteem. Over concern about a child’s self esteem causes them to give praises without giving instruction on how to improve their work. Hirsch addresses the idea of higher order thinking, and states that higher order thinking is the difference between a novice and an expert and is domain specific. Thus the idea that constructivist approach fosters higher order thinking in the various academic subjects is unfounded. The class period should be “formed into a little drama with a beginning, middle, and end, well directed but not rigidly scripted by the teacher” (Hirsch, 1996).

My Position

Windschitl and Hirsch are both shortsighted. A blend of the two methods is best. Windschitl makes his argument by discussing how to solve some of the challenges of the child-centered approach, completely ignoring the fact that it is impossible to have students responsible for their own learning all the time. Hirsch claims that traditional methods of teaching are best as is indicated in current research. What the research he used actually says is that time, focus, and knowing what to expect for the day, or class period, are essential for academic success, as well as having teachers with high warmth, giving constructive feedback, and are businesslike in manner; which, in my experience, can also be interpreted as firm but fair. All of those qualities are necessary in a teacher whether it be in a child-centered classroom or in a teacher-centered classroom.

Hirsch’s attack on the less-more admonitions of various national education organizations that promote best practices is foolish. Less does not mean eliminate. More does not mean replace. Best practices promotes that which is developmentally appropriate, and takes into account the diversity in the classroom. As Dr. Clifford Hansen, a music teacher at San Jose City College, once said, if I have 30 students in a classroom then I need to have 30 different ways to explain the concept I am teaching (Glasgow, 1969, paraphrased). Dr. Hansen understood that while for some learning the circle of fifths in the lecture is sufficient, other students will need to see a diagram, to hear it, to see it played, to play it themselves, or see it demonstrated in a real piece of music, or any combination of these. Does providing sufficient time and attention to the individual needs of his students in understanding the concept of the circle of fifths take away precious time from instruction? I think not.

On the other hand there are times when the teacher does act primarily as the dispenser of knowledge. In Kindergarten there is much in the way of teacher directed activities because the children are too young to take charge of their own academic learning. A child is not going to discover phonics without a teacher telling them about the relationship between sounds and letters and words. This does not mean that there can not be some activities that give children creative freedom, such as painting a holiday themed picture. When the opportunity occurs you can give them the time they need to create a good piece of work, the tools they need to do so, and the techniques on how to use the tools effectively and how to create a particular effect a child might be looking for (Knight, 2007). Time, tools and techniques also apply to other subject areas, such as math. Students need time to master a new mathematical concept, they need the tools to work with the new math problem, and they need the techniques to effectively use their time and tools. The concept is true in every classroom.

An artist can not be rushed when creating a piece of art without compromising the intended finished work. A child learning how to read can not be rushed without compromising their ability to become fluent readers. A child learning number sense can not be rushed into learning addition and subtraction without compromising their future understanding of multiplication and division. Breadth is important. People need to be well rounded. In fact, breadth is so important that there are general education requirements in college. However, depth is also needed, otherwise the information will have no lasting value to the student and will not be retained.

The old adage of, “practice makes perfect”, is true and correct. We know that the more you read the better you get at it. The more you work at playing the piano the easier it gets to sight read and to play more complex pieces. Practice is important. No one with their head on straight will say otherwise, and I dare say that most advocates for a child-centered approach have their heads on straight. Practice, however, does not denote understanding. If a six year old can read at a 5th grade level that does not mean they understand what they are reading. If a preschool aged child knows their ABCs it does not mean that they connect it to reading. This is where we need reflective inquiry and innovative classroom activities to gauge the actual understanding of students, and help facilitate understanding. Reflective inquiry is often out of the picture in a teacher-centered classroom where the teacher does most of the thinking (Brown, 2003). The teacher-centered approach does work, but it does not mean that we can not do better. Mimeographs and type writers have been replaced with the more efficient computer. Should we still widely use those today? Granted, the teacher-centered approach is not nearly so outdated, and still has its place, but the argument that it’s worked for all these years, as is (Hirsch, 1996), is a bit fallacious and closed minded. Modern thought and technology have simply made old ideas better.

Both the teacher-centered approach and the child-centered approach have value. When this is understood by teachers they pedagogically improve. Over generalizations of the two approaches lead to a dichotomy that should not exist and can be harmful (Schuh, 2004). Either approach “is not appropriate in all situations and cannot cover all of the complexities and idiosyncrasies of subjects and teaching situations” (Ahara, 1995). Polarizing the issue can cause an unbalanced approach to teaching, which would be a great disservice to students.

References

Abbeduto, L. (2006). Should Schools Adopt a Constructivist Approach to Education? Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Educational Psychology, 4th Ed., 148(2). McGraw-Hill

Ahara, K. (1995). Teacher-centered and child-centered pedagogical approaches in teaching children’s literature. Education, 115(3), 332.

Brown, K. L. (2003). From teacher-centered to learner-centered curriculum: Improving learning in diverse classrooms. Education, 124(1), 49-54.

Hirsch, Jr., E. D. (1996). Reality’s Revenge: Research and Ideology. American Educator.

Glasgow, J. (1969). Personal Journal.

Knight, R. (2007). The Three T’s. Creative Arts Lecture. Yuba College.

Schuh, K. L. (2004). Learner-centered principles in teacher-centered practices? Teaching & Teacher Education, 20(8), 833-846. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2004.09.008

Windschitl, M. (1999). The Challenges of Sustaining a Constructivist Classroom Culture. Phi Delta Kappan.

Sometime in the following month of May, my husband showed me an Anime Music Video (AMV – an unofficial, fan made video of a Japanese animated series or movie set to music that the fan felt fit the anime, or theme). The anime was one I had never seen or heard of before (my husband gave me a single sentence synopsis). The video was set to music I had never heard before.

When the music began, with the image of a blond boy bandaged up with a bleak expression, I felt . . . anticipation. Something was coming. The lyrics spoke to me as I watched the images of the characters in the act of moving forward or struggling or being in a pensive state. Yeah, I was downcast, lost in my own tragedy, bubble wrapping myself against the pain, stagnant in my sorrows. Inert. I could relate. Then, the chorus came in. “So, let go, let go. Jump in. Oh, well, whatchya waitin’ for? It’s all right. ‘Cause there’s beauty in the breakdown. So, let go, let go. Just get in. Oh, it’s so amazing here. It’s all right, ’cause there’s beauty in the breakdown.” I was hit with a flash of a gale-storm but instead of being ripped to shreds and scattered in pieces I was buoyed up. A life giving flame coursed through my body, starting at the navel, simultaneously moving to the top of my head and down to my toes, back to my navel, the two forces colliding, moving upward, and enveloping my body. My heart pounded in syncopation to the music. It was as though the voice of God was speaking to me, sending me a message. The world changed, it was just me, and the message – the music and the images on the screen. Oh, something good was going to come out of all this sorrow. I needed to let go, and plunge myself into life despite all the uncertainty and fear. What was I waiting for? For things to magically get better? Fool girl, were you letting fear rule your life, again? There was still something amazing to be had in my life, even now. But I would never find it if I stood still. I needed to move; not in any direction, but forward, giving it my all.

“It gains the more it gives. And it rises with the fall.” Oh, right, where did my unselfishness go? I needed to find it again, and engage in selfless acts of service. And not just any selfless acts of service, but to the man I proclaimed to love, but had forgotten to show it. Right. Duh. Love is a verb. “So hand me that remote, can’t you see that all that stuff’s a sideshow.” Huh. Distractions. Too many distractions. I was overly involved in science fiction clubs and forums and other such things that took up most of my free time. It was all exacerbating the difficulties in my life, my marriage. Yes sir, Lord sir. Get rid of the distractions, get rid of the things that prevented me from attending to the things that matter most. “Such boundless pleasure, there’s no time for later, now, you can’t await, you’re own arrival, you’ve twenty seconds to comply.” The good things in life were again punctuated, but with admonishments to not stupidly procrastinate. Patience, procrastination and idleness are three very different things. I was stuck in the last two. I needed to gain the first, and to do so I needed to act, and soon. As in, now. Yet, I needed to be patient with the people around me. Calmness and serenity while moving forward.

These thoughts barreled into my mind at great speed, all at once, with the passing of each lyric and the oh so important images that accompanied the song. The blond boy, bloodied up, seemingly beaten, yet smiling in conviction. A gentle kiss, eyes reflecting determination, dire life situations, bloody battles with internal and external adversaries. The contrasting images of happy and content moments with those of great adversity and afflictions coupled with moments of simple human pain and rage; these all accentuated the lyrics. The music supported the message with its rhythms and percussion, driving the message deep into my heart, my spirit, my very soul, becoming an integral part of my entire being. The chorus kicked in again, and oh, I could let go, and jump in and remember that there was beauty in the breakdown. There’s beauty somewhere in this mess. I only had to change my vantage point to find it. And oh, it’s all right. Everything would be all right. Somehow. Images of seemingly impossible foes flew by, but there was a smile, and the foe was beaten back in dismay. The lyrics changed to simply repeating, “hey now” driven by the bass line in the music. It was as though I was being given a moment to digest what I had learned, and was flooded with contrasting images again, and a few darker ones, as though stating, that there was an unseen adversary in my midst and that I had to be aware of it. I needed to remember it, always. I could not let my guard down. I needed to constantly watch my thoughts, my words, my deeds.

The chorus sang again. The same blond boy only younger appeared, standing alone, gazing at the backs of those who ostracized him. An overlaid image of him angry and defiant, and yet, still determined, another of him sitting alone on a swing, of the swing being empty, of him standing and crying, alone. Oh, yes. I intimately knew those feelings, along with anguish and despair and fear and hopelessness. But the lyrics were telling me it was amazing here on earth, in this world, right now, and that there was still beauty, still something worthwhile in life beyond the practical, beyond just one more day. And then there was the boy again, working hard, overcoming such great obstacles. He, and others depicted, endured pain, physical and emotional. But they never gave up. They never relented. And I knew I could do that too. I knew then that there was beauty in all adversity. That blessings would come out of all dark times if I would let go and jump in, without reserve. Without fear. And that if I endured well, armed with trust and faith in the Lord, the fiery darts of hell, the great darkness, would not harm me or mine.

The music mellowed out, tapering off, yet giving a feeling as though life was still going on. The last image was of the blond boy happily running towards people who seemed to care for him. He was no longer alone, and he was all right. I was breathless in my astonishment at this revelation given through song and animation, inundated by the greatness of the message. My soul rejoiced. Grateful tears stung my eyes. I was in awe that I was given the blessing of this message. It was another testament of hope; and there was hope. I knew it. But I had to do my part to make that hope a reality, and I could. I would. . .

. . . I did. I took the lessons of the moment and vigilantly applied them. If I hadn’t permanently internalized the message of the moment, along with a few other epiphanies, the most significant successes in my life would not have come to pass. Life would be harder, fraught with more tears and heartache and stress. . .

. . . The moment was mine. Mine and mine alone. So when the world returned to what it was with me standing in my room, my husband sitting in front of me facing the computer screen, all I could say, albeit a bit breathlessly, was, “Wow, that was amazing. I have to see that anime now.” The message was for me so that I might salvage the most important thing in my life from the wreckage. My family.

Note: My husband and I got back together two years ago, much to our daughter’s delight. The anime was called “Naruto” and the song was called “Let Go” by Frou Frou.

This is going to be a bit of a stub review so as not to spoil anything for new readers.

Beddor has an interesting take on the Wonderland universe. Redd is Alyss’s Aunt, who attempted to usurp Alyss’s rightful place as Queen of all Wonderland. Alyss is currently Queen, and is of the Spades deck. But, she has a problem. The Clubs and Hearts decks are working against her, and not only that, but the powers of Imagination have been taken away by a unique weapon of war. Alyss’s Imagination is the source of her power, but fortunately she also has a good head on her shoulders and is able to think things through, ah, but isn’t that a part of imagination? To be able to find ways to solve a problem. Imagination is indeed slowly returning, but very slowly. In the mean time the Clubs decks are rounding up all the Imaginationists, painters, poets, etc, who are unable to create works of art due to the loss of the Power of Imagination.

The prologue starts with Alyss trying to find out if there are any clues on how to help Wonderland on Earth. In so doing she becomes stuck on Earth, unable to return to a Wonderland that requires her attention. That in itself is a symptom of something being very very wrong in Wonderland. This causes the reader to wonder, what made Alyss desperate enough to return to earth, and how is she going to get back to Wonderland before everything goes all to hell? The prologue essentially acts as a hook to make the reader interested in reading on. It worked.

There are also many World War 2 parallels, such as the rounding up of Imaginationists into relocation camps (not everyone has an imagination), propaganda speeches, hypocrisy, etc. There is also a clear distinction between the good guys and the bad guys, and I must say Redd is, of course, the ostentatious obnoxious kind. She is working with Arch the Head of the Clubs, who is better at being evil than she is. The Oracles, who are the caterpillars (which I found amusing), are giving prophecies to both sides of the conflict, declaring loyalty to an Everqueen, protecting her and the Heart Crystal. But no one has a clue who this Everqueen is. It is one more thing that Alyss has to deal with to try to figure out how to heal Wonderland.

Beddor has given the Alice in Wonderland story more breadth and depth. It helps to be familiar with the original Through the Looking Glass story, or to have seen or read some rendition of it (Movies, Disney, etc.), but not entirely necessary. In fact, there is enough information in this novel that I was able to understand and glean what had occurred in the previous novels without having read them (which I haven’t). Though, I’m sure I missed out on some subtlety. I like Dodge, the fellow in love with Alyss, and I like Hatter. Hatter is cool. I was amused to see a weapon’s diagram of the AD-52 (Automatic Dealer). The entire world is WEIRD. Of course! This is a Through the Looking Glass story. It’s Wonderland. Of COURSE it’s going to be weird! It’s in the nature of the beast.

The novel is classified as Young Adult Fiction, ages 12 and up. I have no arguments there. So, if you’re looking for something bizarre and interesting to read, this is it.

The idea that students can choose for themselves what it is that they are writing needs to be true. I recall in seventh grade my teacher saying that we were each going to write a story about anything we wanted. We each had to tell her briefly what we were going to write about. I, being a fantasy fan, wanted to write about fairies and elves. She told me I couldn’t write it, because the story had to be based in reality. I was devastated. She had said anything. However, that is not what she meant. She meant anything within a certain context, and that context was our own world. I managed to get away with writing a story about a family taking a hike in the woods, coming upon some strange creature that could possessed people, and then everything seemed fine at the end but the younger brother had red eyes indicating possession. My teacher really liked the ending. Was it completely based in reality? No, but it was close enough that she allowed it, thank goodness. I don’t know what it is that teachers have against fantasy or science fiction stories. It requires the same amount of work, more so even to have the imaginary world make sense since you have to build the world and the people, customs, culture, from the ground up, along with consistency and continuity to avoid storyline pitfalls or loopholes.

It’s also a bit hypocritical. In elementary school many of the books that are read to students are anthropomorphic, which is not based in reality at all. Then there are books like the Magic Tree House series or the Adventures of the Bailey School Kids where things happen that are not possible. What? A tree house that can transport Jack and Annie back and forth through time using books as the medium? Impossible! But children love it! And teaches a bit of history at the same time. What? Strange unexplainable things happening at a school with genies and unicorns and such things? Impossible! But what fun to read! So, the message is, we can read fantastical stories but we can’t write them? Does that make sense? Just because a piece of writing is not based in reality does not mean it doesn’t have any value. I dare say, it even helps people talk about things that are very difficult to talk about since what’s happening in the story is not real, but we can still relate to it. No matter the genre being written the author still draws upon his or her knowledge and experience when writing.

Now, if an assignment is to write a persuasive piece or a journal then fantasy writing would not be appropriate, but with those pieces of writing the parameters are set. After you figure out the purpose of your writing, then the writing process is the same. Why should it matter if a child chooses to write a story that has elves traveling in spaceships instead of about humans traveling in airplanes? I believe that it is important to allow students the creative freedom to write any kind of story. I recently read a story by a first grader that was about a mom killing a baby, finding someone to help her kill everyone, then the two killed everyone but then they had no one else to kill so they killed each other. The illustrations were quite gory. One might think that this was a disturbed child but the child was exposed to horror movies by her older siblings and this was her way of working out what it was she was watching. Students need that freedom of expression and creativity.

I remember in high school art class that while we could pick the subject matter of our pieces, we always had to work within the medium provided, be it embossing, watercolor and ink, or tempura paints. At Yuba College, I took a Creative Arts Class that was geared towards preschool aged children. We had to work with the very tools that we were going to ask our preschoolers to use and do the activities we would ask them to do. Ramona Knight explained what was expected of us (lots of art projects with directions for a portfolio), and after talking for about 45 minutes she said, okay, get to work. I raised my hand and asked, what are we doing? She said, whatever you want. I was flabbergasted. What did she mean whatever I wanted? After establishing that she really meant whatever you want, I was in a state of shock. I did not know what to do. I literally spent the next hour and a half out of that three hour class doing nothing. Miss Ramona (we called everyone Miss so and so, it’s a preschool thing) after a while suggested that I look through the textbook to see if anything caught my eye. Time was ticking by, and I didn’t want to be left with nothing to show for my three hours of class. So, I picked blotto art, and I was really happy with the results. I still have it. Once I managed to get over the hurdle of really having a choice I was able to enjoy the class. It was. . . liberating.

I was so used to having someone tell me what I had to do, especially in an academic setting, that for a while I didn’t know how to do something completely on my own. There is something wrong with that. There are times when it’s good to teach specific techniques and how to use certain tools, but sometimes we need to have the choice to really do what whatever we want.

Tompkins, G. E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century. A Balanced Approach. 5th edition. Allyn & Bacon: Pearson Education.

Hazel’s teacher, a few of the parents, and Robert all found the suggestion quite humorous.

My husband was adamantly against facebook and I decided it wasn’t worth the strife in our marriage and let it go.

Patience is a good thing.

I started getting friend requests from people that I hadn’t seen in years that I still cared about, and also from family that I never get a chance to talk to we’re all so busy. There were also fan pages at San Jose State University which get more frequently updated than the main website pages, like the career center page.

So, I approached Robert about facebook again, months later. He was annoyed, but said he’d think about it. I would wait a long time, and then ask if he’d given it any further thought. So, over time, and mentioning that I wouldn’t let facebook distract me from doing what I need to be doing.

Just yesterday I asked him about it again, and he said he was fine with it. We’ve basically made a pact. I get to use facebook as long as it doesn’t prevent me from doing what I need to be doing. If I ever start getting on facebook instead of doing what needs doing then no more facebook for me again.

I think it’s a fair trade.
And, it was worth the wait.

I sat down at the computer to start doing homework and saw what she wrote. I laughed hard. My husband was like, what? So, of course, I had to have him read it because I just couldn’t read it to him. This is exactly what she wrote. Enjoy.

“I love my mom. She is good a lot. She helps me a lot.29+1=30 We like her. We do work together. My mom is nice. She is great. Mom goes to school! But she is at school all day long! BOO said the pumkin 30+1=31 We give hugs and kiss. I coler for her. Its omost Halloween! I love Halloween!! You are a good! 100+0=100 My mom loves me a lot! I help her a lot! I go to school just like my mom!! 1+100=101 I think dad and my mom is very cool. My mom and I have fun times but not a lot . My dad is lazy. He is a bump. Me and mom are not lazy.”

Note: My husband was laid off back in April. I think that’s where she’s getting her idea from. . . that, and sometimes he’s in a lazy mood and will say, I’m feeling lazy.