Friday, October 5, 2012

Responses to Kumashiro and Picower

The Donovans represented in the talks at HGSE!

Both Drs. Kumashiro and Picower were greatly impressed with the questions that were posed to them; questions that lifted their game individually and collectively.

In this thread, please post any responses, comments, and/or questions you'd like the collective to think about. As much as possible, make connections to others' thoughts, so that we create a virtual conversation of sorts.


25 comments:

  1. After being able to think on the knowledge that was shared with us over the past 48 hours there are two things that I am still wondering about. The first is the idea of social justice inside and outside of the classroom. Both Dr.Picower and Dr.Kumashiro touched upon these topics and the question posed by Robert from HGSE has forced me to think does out social justice inside and outside of the classroom model what is happening on a local level or global level. This is not to say that the two have to be separate but I do feel that the needs of our students are constantly being pushed down the list so we can take on global issues. I even believe that it addressing the global issue over the local is connected to the societal concept of being "cultured", aka thinking beyond the self. However, I question if it is fair of us to ask our students to think beyond themselves if they are facing the same or similar issues in front of our faces. Furthermore, how do we specifically teach social justice now in our pre-prac, when at least in my case, I have no clue where my CT stands on the matter and where exactly it is incorporated in the curriculum beyond the inserted standards of "diversity".

    The second matter I would like to address is Ashley's question which was applicable again at Friday's symposium. We have all committed to urban education and are willing to aid our students to work against the system while working within it. Yet, what about the private, charter, what ever one would like to label them, schools that serve majority whites and do not have to tackle social justice on a local level because it doesn't exist?

    *somewhat unrelated but Ashley's point led to a conversation after the symposium also made me think about June Jordan's piece Black Studies: Bringing Back the Person.

    -Hill

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. " Furthermore, how do we specifically teach social justice now in our pre-prac, when at least in my case, I have no clue where my CT stands on the matter and where exactly it is incorporated in the curriculum beyond the inserted standards of "diversity"."

      This is a point that I wish Picower had gone into some depth to acknowledge. I just read her book "Practice What You Teach" and she does bring up the political precariousness many first-year or pre-service teachers may feel in bringing up SJE topics, but categorized those feelings as excuse-making for the transformative activist work we need to do. I'm still wrestling with that stance, as you can see below.

      Maybe this is something we can talk about together as a group. Is social justice something your CT has independently brought up? Would you feel comfortable bringing up SJE to your CT - why or why not?

      As for SJE in majority white schools - man, that's tough. Been thinking about this one a lot, especially with the rise of "Whiteness Studies" and Tim Wise saying we have to critically confront whiteness. If for some reason I was placed in a fancy-pants majority-white prep school, I think I'd focus on simply opening up a dialogue on how race and privilege play a part in students' lives, simply because so much of white identity involves denying that there even is a racial consciousness. That seems like the necessary first step for even getting anywhere else... IDK.

      Delete
    2. After listening to the lectures by both Dr. Kumashiro and Dr. Picower, I believe I got a better understanding of how social justice can be translated into my classroom. Since I am in a first grade class, I have been trying to grasp ways that I can incorporate the language of social justice, both globally and domestically. Hillary posed a very difficult question about the challenges in teaching social justice. With a pretty tight schedule, and different agenda's, such as my schools mission, principals vision and my CT's belief's, how can I insert my own idea's?

      Picower's story about the fourth grade teacher and his students desire to challenge child labor in the chocolate business really motivated me. I saw how social justice became part of the curriculum, and even made it richer because the students wanted to read, and wanted to write. The students motivation level soared, which in turn increased their academic progress. The teacher did not use a separate time to talk about social justice, but rather gave the students reading and writing about social justice during their regular literacy time. I realized that I could do this in my first grade class by incorporating social justice into math and literacy, which could help them get interested in social justice at an early age.

      Now the second challenge is how do we get our CT, and administration on board with our social justice idea's? As new teachers we have the ability to bring new idea's, and even if it causes friction with your CT, the fact that the topic of social justice in the classroom is being discussed is important. We need to be the ones to generate these conversations and get teachers and administrators talking about incorporating social justice into the curriculum.

      Delete
  2. First off, I just finished Picower's "Practice What You Teach" and came away from it feeling challenged, uncomfortable - and affirmed.

    One of Picower's main points in the book is that 1) teaching is inherently political and so SJE is necessary, but 2) merely teaching for SJE alone is NOT sufficient, and it is incumbent on teachers to be activists outside the classroom.

    I find this stance challenging (in a good way), but I also have additional questions for Picower. Is the ability to agitate outside the classroom not a privilege? (IE fear of firing, the free time and money that enable one to have the time and space to speak out, etc.) Maybe some of us would come to the conclusion that we are better off being in the classroom for our students then being fired for our activity out of it. I am still going through reflection, wondering if that is always a fair stance?

    While Picower addresses those concerns, she says that they are actually concerns only raised to justify not working as an activist. In other words, she frames those statements as excuses people give to delay or postpone their work as transformative activists. What do y'all think? (And if anyone else read the book and thinks I'm simplifying the argument feel free to check me...)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was very happy to know that there are many people that are fighting for social justice in schools. People that are not just tired of all the unfair treatments in the education system, people that are not giving up that are fighters! Even though there are so many ideas that will impact social inequalities in schools, we need to be aware how much freedom you will actually have once we leave Boston College and get a job. Are we going to be lucky enough to have administration support? Or we are just going to be silence and get isolated from the REAL things going on in this country with education?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Roberts question of what social justice means for students helped me think about what topics are appropriate for students and that all students will not have the same view of social justice. For some students, as Robert pointed out, social justice might mean being able to walk home from school without being shot. For others, SJE might be about child labor or racism or sexism ect... My point is that there are A LOT of issues that can be discussed in the classroom, and as I teacher how can I focus in on topics that are relevant, interesting and appropriate for my students? For example, will teaching about racism in housing have the same effect on urban school and suburban school students? This digs into a deeper question. Should SJE have the same effect on all students?

    When I being to include SJE in my curriculum I want to make the topics relevant and interesting for my students, and I am trying to figure out the best way to do that. I feel as though working in an urban school, I should start with, the idea of social justice locally. This can help activate my students understanding of social justice education by linking it to their experiences. Once they have developed a knowledge of social justice then it will be easier to learn about broader global issues.

    I also worry though that my language around topics will be biased. I do not want to impose my views on the students, but rather give them the information and let them make decisions for themselves. I believe that as a teacher it is difficult, but important to separate your own views during SJE.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sean is incredibly right when he say that SJE should be different for each group of students who experience it, both demographically and in terms of individual student histories. The HGSE Students for Diversity lectures really served to open up my perceptions, not so comfortably, to the notion that Picower's phrase "You can decorate a jail cell, but you still aren't free" could apply to the direction in which I was headed as a teacher. While I don't think any of the Donovan's will be the content-heavy maintenance teachers who simply turn out impressive (and still often talented) status-quo students and test scores, I know even more certainly that we're going to have to teach and work for social justice in ways far more complicated than I originally imagined. A consequence of a dense political landscape for us, combined with the unique composition of student perspectives we work with calls for flexible measures carried out collectively after thorough planning and interrogation of self and classroom-community.

    While what Kevin Kumashiro called "the rich interdisciplinary curriculum" and lack of high stakes testing evident in Chicago Lab schools is a foundation for our students' academic sake, I am feeling more that the concerted movement both speakers asked for will take more than critical lesson planning on our part. I look forward to delving more into TAG Boston (along with maybe Robert's Thursday group?), for example, as resources for meeting other similar minded folks. From there, along with working at our own schools, we could gain better vantage points for how our local institutions relate to communities, with particular emphasis on the disconnects between the two. I also really appreciated Kumashiro's mention of parents activism. Hopefully, if we perform some serious looking into how we can serve outside of schools, then some serious opportunities for action would become visible.

    ReplyDelete
  6. As Hillary stated, we need to think about social justice on the local and global level. Sean I agree that there is certain topics that may interest or engage certain students. Yamira, I also wonder if we will be encouraged and supported to engage in critical thought post BC. Jessica, I also agree that a slight more guidance and structural support on what should be done would have been helpful as novice teachers of SJE in public urban schools. Dan, I also appreciated Kumashiro's support of the lab schools and I plan to look to their structure for some small guidance in determining my own class structure since it has been deemed performing and does not mimic the "drive for standardized testing".

    My concern, and my question is centered around teaching and engaging students in SJE. I have heard individuals say that they support the learning and will implement it in their classroom and have but no one has shared a story or experience where students didn't respond to the material presented. I am not sure if authenticity has a place here, but I feel that I would like more guidance on how to engage students in SJE, and if not, what type of stance should we as educators be taking on the topics. I do not want to preach a doctrine to students and want students to think freely but also to spark interest in their minds and hearts around SJE.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I truly enjoyed hearing what everyone here has to say, and couldn't agree with everyone's view points more! In thinking more about Picower's point of "education being inherently political," I can't help but think more and more about when the functionality of education will change to match the needs of our society today. Yes SJE can mean different things to different students in a variety of learning environments, but I am still grappling with facts of educational purpose. Education was birthed in a time where there was clear social injustice, and its purpose was to further advance the culture of the people who would ultimately run things. It reminds me of a conversation we al shared in Social Contexts when Marcus brought up the economical perspectives around out-sourecing and the purpose of education in the U.S. I would really like to explore more about this and question whether or not SJE is truly contingent on the functionality of education and it's purpose, more than anything else. (Sorry if I am not making sense, you know my brain)

    ReplyDelete
  8. I truly enjoyed hearing what everyone here has to say, and couldn't agree with everyone's view points more! In thinking more about Picower's point of "education being inherently political," I can't help but think more and more about when the functionality of education will change to match the needs of our society today. Yes SJE can mean different things to different students in a variety of learning environments, but I am still grappling with facts of educational purpose. Education was birthed in a time where there was clear social injustice, and its purpose was to further advance the culture of the people who would ultimately run things. It reminds me of a conversation we al shared in Social Contexts when Marcus brought up the economical perspectives around out-sourecing and the purpose of education in the U.S. I would really like to explore more about this and question whether or not SJE is truly contingent on the functionality of education and it's purpose, more than anything else. (Sorry if I am not making sense, you know my brain)

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi all,

    I've been wrestling with what I think about last week's lectures— Picower's in particular— and I realize that I'm not going to know the answers to the issues I'm grappling with for at least several years (after having some real experience in urban educational settings), if ever. But I also know that we have no shortage of strong opinions in this cohort, so I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

    Picower's presentation troubled me on several accounts. First, I would have found her stereotyped belittling of white female teachers offensive if it hadn't been so ridiculous (and unproductive). Should white women continue to constitute an overwhelming majority of the teaching force in this country? Absolutely not. But does a video featuring a SMH-inducing Valley Girl-accented voiceover talking about her fear of black male students— coupled with the stereotypical ghetto rap soundtrack in the background— bring us anywhere closer to an examined, nuanced effort to overcome stereotypes in the name of social justice? No, not really.
    Instead of making a video riddled with the kind of stereotypes she thinks she's overcoming, I want to know what Picower thinks can be done about the reality of racial dynamics in schools. Given that they can't change their demographics, what can the 80% of educators who are white women DO to become more knowledgeable and effective in their fields-- other than profusely apologize for their existence?

    Secondly, I found her story about the teacher who encouraged his students to march in Times Square troubling (er, "problematic.") I agree completely with this teacher's politics, but I question whether this is appropriate in a public school. (I realize that I will probably get shouted down for this, but I'm putting it out there in the interest of open dialogue.) If my child came home from public school and announced that he was attending a march against, say, gay rights, or for, say, the reinstitution of prayer in the classroom, I would be outraged; I would feel that the teacher was inappropriately instilling his own politics into the classroom—— that he was (at best) using peer pressure to get his students' nascent political consciousnesses to align with his own, or (at worst) brainwashing them. Indoctrination from the left feels far less egregious to me than indoctrination from the right, but indoctrination is indoctrination, and doesn't belong in the classroom. The role of teachers is to help students learn *how* to think, not *what* to think, and I am unsure where Picower's example lies on this continuum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Emily,

      You always bring up great questions that challenges my current beliefs and also interrogates what we learn and to remember to not take it as rhetoric. That is lovely.

      I have listened to Ms. Picower give the same basic lecture twice now and when I did hear it the first time, I felt that the media used could have been more powerful. I believe it sometimes acts to hurt the case she was making. I have not read her book but since this is her calling in education, I have faith that she has some great ideas in there on how to reflect on pedagogy and how we are teaching the students. I think it is a great hook to look at the white females who may not understand the urban culture but I was definitely someone who fell into the myths and traps of the American identity and dream. It is important to remember that socialization is everywhere and starts as soon you are born or arrive in this country.

      I think it is her role to make people uncomfortable about it and in person she seemed great in talking to people around her about these issues. It always takes me back to Jansen's dialougic space and I constantly think about how I can actively fight against some things while allowing that space so that everyone can come to the table together.

      I also can see the perspective from a parent who believes that their child is being indoctrinated and assimilated into the teacher's beliefs without their consent. I think Ms. Picower's point is that current school structures are currently indoctrinating and assimilating students of color into a dominant majority's system without their consent. I see myself as inherently political and how I can be political is to bring these issues forward and take the student's voice to action.

      This didnt turn out as clear as I wanted to but I would love to continue this conversation on the blog and in person

      Delete
    4. Emily, thank you for keeping it real.

      I totally hear your concerns about the movie she showed about some of her white, female preservice teachers. While I thought the film was hilarious, getting white teachers to "buy-in" to SJE after essentially being ridiculed as useless is probably not a great look. The film made me think of the MadTV sketch "Nice White Lady", which again made me laugh, but also is probably not the best for changing hearts and minds, especially when one feature of whiteness is a huge reluctance to dig deep and identify race as a salient factor in one's identity. I know a ton of social justice Tumblr folk who would jump on me and say that's coddling white folks - maybe it is. On the other hand, if we don't have "buy-in" as a movement where will we go from here?

      With that said Picower does mention strategies that she uses in a positive way to get white preservice teachers thinking about race and equity. I would be happy to lend you the book if you'd like as she gives far more constructive strategies in the book than "playing a fraught video."

      As far as whether or not we are indoctrinating students - I do think we have to be conscientious of letting our students come to their own conclusions. However I would argue that even doing that - akin to the information presented in the Arizona "Raza Studies" classes that became banned - is inherently political in today's educational climate. Even providing different POVs is political! So with that said, as someone very committed to SJE I think a good starting point that addresses the concerns you mentioned is to show a breadth and depth of critical literature from MANY sides, giving your students a safe space to both agree and dissent. Easier said than done, but the only way to raise informed, active, engaged citizens.

      Delete
    5. Em, thank you for your honesty. I also felt like it was not a useful video to support her argument. I felt like it focused more on the negative teacher stereotypes than her message on why it is important for teachers to be involved in social justice issues. Teachers should become more aware of social justice issues so that they can adequately serve the community they are teaching in.

      Delete
  11. I really enjoyed reading through all of your discussion topics, and feel proud and privileged to be a part of this group of advocates. Both of the speakers were phenomenal, and I left the presentation feeling inspired. I am wondering about two things: intentionality, and how to implement SJE in early elementary grades.

    I agree completely with Ashley's point about conceptions of SJE in predominantly white schools, as well as Dr. Kumishiro's discussion of the counterinuitiveness of school reform. As social justice educators, we know first hand how difficult it is to make visible, interrupt, and change structures of oppression. Is is important to recognize that resistance to change is predicated upon the maintenance of power, and that the reproduction of social inequity is being facilitated by the continued use of ineffective schooling practices. If every student relieved a relevant, engaging and empowering education, there would be less bodies to exploit through under-employment and incarceration.

    We have identified teaching, and specifically, SJE as an excellent opportunity to enact these processes of interruption and empowerment. What concerns me is that, for all the impassioned discussion I enjoy with the cohort, I feel that I am becoming discouraged by to the toxicity of the system. In my third-grade practicum experience so far, testing and the adherence to rigorous academic standards takes precedence. Very infrequently have I seen students engaging in discussions relevant to their own lived experiences. And while there is an environment of caring and high expectations, teachers are under intense pressure to meet levels of student proficiency.

    Admittedly, I don't know what SJE should look like in a first, second or third grade classroom. Particularly as a cultural outsider, the last thing I want to do is teach these young students about their own realities from a point of authority. Anybody have ideas about activities/ strategies they would use in an early elementary classroom?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jessie, thank you; you made my point much better than I did:

    "Particularly as a cultural outsider, the last thing I want to do is teach these young students about their own realities from a point of authority."

    I think that sums up what rubbed me the wrong way about Picower's video on the social justice crusader/teacher: it seemed that his approach runs the risk of telling students what they think, and not how they should learn to listen to their own reactions and then figure out (after much deliberation) what they think, and what they should do about it. I don't know what this teacher's own socioeconomic background is, but I actually think it's more irrelevant (at least in these kind of cases) than many in this field seem to believe; *any* teacher who presumes to tell a student what his reality is, or what he believes, is doing that student a grave disservice (which epitomizes the opposite of what SJE, in my opinion, should stand for and be.)

    ReplyDelete
  13. I really enjoyed Kumashiro's lecture on the problems in today's education system. As I listened to his speech I remember thinking "YES!", "This is exactly on point!". I think Dr. Kumashiro brought up some great points during his speech. I particularly enjoyed his point on government decisions that affect the whole education system and his point on why teachers have been the scape goat for all of the problem in education. I thought Dr. Kumashiro's point on the role of government in education was of particular importance especially during such a political year. As this year's presidential elections come closer, different educational policies are a hot topic for each candidate. Each one arguing that their method is better. However, as I listened to the previous presidential debate I remember asking myself if any president had ever been inside a classroom for more than a day. Each one says they know what is best, but where is the voice of the parents, students and teachers? I find that there is a miscommunication problem in education. Solutions that sound great in theory end up deepening the problem. In my opinion a trendy solution will not fix the underlying problems with education or the "debt".

    Along the lines of government policy there is the testing movement. There is so much wrong with this movement as Kumashiro notes. According to Bloom's Taxanomy we are providing the lowest level of learning by teaching children to memorize facts for a test. Meaningless facts that will soon be forgotten and thought of as irrelevant. I advocate for higher levels of learning where students create and evaluate. Yes, there is memorizing along the way, but there needs to be relevancy and meaning. There is something wrong with the push for having only test scores count. I think of my own school. Recently there has been a change in policy where the only material that counts in grading are tests, projects, lab reports, etc. When I first heard it, I thought this is great because it is more along the lines of a college education. Then I read what did not count: effort, homework, group work, class participation and classwork. Students are prepared for tests every week. I wonder if they are learning or preparing to take a test. Some people would say there is no difference. I think there is a huge difference.

    Then teachers are blamed when students do not achieve high test scores. The teacher's and a student's success is weighed by a score on a test. Again, what matters is the score not the learning. A good teacher achieves high test scores. But, I ask myself is this teacher teaching students to take a test or to learn and think for themselves. Is there a healthy balance?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Something that continually resonates in my mind is Kumashiro's statement on common sense and the need for a shift of consciousness. He brought up various historical examples of what seemed to be common sense at the time, but is, in actuality, pretty absurd.

    It reminds me of another historical example of this, where an artist, Marcel Duchamp, submitted a urinal propped on its side (a sculpture) to an art show under the pseudonym R. Mutt. When the board that oversaw the art show, of which Duchamp was a member, rejected the urinal, adamantly dismissing it as "not art," Duchamp caused an uproar and resigned from the board. This single act changed the world of art - the Academy, which had been defining what was and was not art for centuries, was all of a sudden under scrutiny. How did they become the ones who called all the shots? Who gets to define art? How had they been defining art? What is art? What is beauty? And then there was this huge shift and reconfiguration of the art world...

    I share this because before Thursday night, I thought that engaging in sj, for me, was going to be primarily in the classroom. But again, as others have noted, I've been bombarded in a span of two days with the notion that sj is an integrative process of action both within and outside of the classroom. And so I wonder, in light of what is perceived to be common sense now and the need for a shift of consciousness, and inspiration from Duchamp, "simply," what does it take for us as teachers to see something like this happen?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Noguera's statements in particular reiterated the fact that we cannot merely practice SJE inside our classrooms. Though what we teach inside of the classroom is wonderful- the fact of the matter is that students have lives outside that might consist of realities we won't be aware of unless we engage them on that level. For all of the folks new to Boston, a great way to engage SJE both inside and outside of the classroom is to try and forge partnerships with community organizations and initiatives that already embody these values. We need more partnerships between communities and classrooms and the great part about the Donovan cohort is that we already come with a SJE stance. A great resource is DSNI in Roxbury. Noguera briefly mentioned Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (DSNI), a community organization committed to sustainable leadership and community empowerment. I worked with them last summer and they have several strong partnerships throughout the Boston area (check out website dsni.org). Catherine and I are working to organize a visit soon:)

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think I remember Luis making a statement at the lecture about how important it is to incorporate social justice with teaching even during our practicum and how it is critical to get young people to start thinking at a deeper level about social justice. In my first grade science class we have been learning about rivers and lakes. We discussed these landforms and how they serve as important resources for people all over the world. My students were amazed that people use lake and river water to bath, wash clothes, and drink from. They are so used to having freshwater in their homes that it felt strange to think about how some people have to leave their home to retrieve water for daily necessities. My students became very interested in this topic and water pollution. They were troubled to learn that some people do not have clean water because trash is being dumped in rivers and lakes especially by factories.
    Every time we have science now they are always want to learn more people bathing and drinking water from a river or lake and I love that I can have a discussion related to social justice with six and seven year olds. They are curious to learn about issues that do not necessarily affect them directly, but that they can relate to. I think it is important for them to learn about social justice issues both on a global and local because it can helps them realize their own privileges and injustice.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hey everyone,

    I thought I’d jump into the conversation later than never. I’m 100% with Marina on her reaction when listening to Dr. Kumashiro. I felt the same way. Everything he said seemed to make so much sense, especially in regards to our (teachers) struggle to shift these illogical frameworks so instilled in educational discourse. He mentioned some of the reforms that are a direct result from this simplistic and commonsensical approach to education, which includes the idea that teachers are to blame for the lack of success. Longer school days have been implemented which implies that teachers need to work harder. In addition, schools have put into effect policies of performance-related pay, incentivizing educational outcomes. I find it insulting to wave money in my face and while saying, “A better score means a better salary,” as though the value in teaching is only monetary. For me at least, and I wouldn’t be surprise that for many of us (Donovans), the value of teaching is watching students find success, however students define this. I see how the frameworks are oppressing teachers, but one thing I’m having trouble wrap my head around is whether these politicians are doing it intentionally? It seems so if the schools they’re “reforming” are looking less like the schools that are succeeding, as Dr. Kumashiro suggests.

    Another topic he briefly talked about that really got me thinking (which was actually in response to a question Luis had) was when he mentioned how Hawaiian language has a word that provides an interchangeable definition that means both teach and learn. How would things look differently in the classroom if the academic environment was known to be a place where only learning occurred and all (students and teacher included) were teaching? How difficult would that be, is it really impossible? I think on an individual level we have a lot more autonomy than we think, regardless of the push to teach to standardized tests. And to a certain extent, this could be the class climate set in the room. I don’t quite know what this would look like, but I don’t see how it would be impossible.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I want to thank Emily for being so real with your comment. I agree with you. I found the demonstration the students conducted at Time Square to be both empowering and problematic. I entirely agree with your point:

    "The role of teachers is to help students learn *how* to think, not *what* to think."

    After listening to Picower's talk, all I could think about was where were the parents?? As educators, we cannot forget the role the home life plays in the lives of our students. I am not sure how I would feel if my child came home saying that he was going to join his teacher and his classmates in a protest against something I did not agree with. A child's education should include communication among all parties involved. In "Precious Knowledge" the fight for ethnic studies was a community effort which included the educator, the students, the school, and the community. Although it is difficult to fight for a cause that every student/parent believes in, it is important to consider the role parent belief, culture, and tradition plays into what we fight for. But I think Jianan is right, I believe Picower was addressing how school socially reproduce the students that attend them. As educators, it is our responsibility to give students the skills and knowledge to fight injustices that they face. I think the demonstration at Times Square was really more an example of what happens when students develop a passion for a cause, how invested they become, and how it can really cross-curriculum through history, writing, reading, and more.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.