Serial code stock Photos, Royalty Free Images, Vectors, Footage
USB-C Dock - 4K Triple Monitor Laptop Docking Station with Dual DisplayPort & HDMI - 100W Power Delivery - USB-C, 4x USB-A Hub - USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-C Dock - Windows & Mac (DK30CH2DEPUE). In the end, the #1 goal is conversions or sales. Standard Shipping 1-2 Weeks 5.00 Priority Shipping 3-5 days 9.00 Express Shipping 1-2 days 26.00 Next Business Day 60.00. I owned a bike shop and sporting goods store in a past life (I've written.
5 Podcast Editing Tips Designed To Save You Time
If you are using any other modern Windows platform (Windows 98/Me and Windows NT 4.0/2020) you should download and install it from Type of Test: Unit Testing Objective. Calculates sound speed in fresh (distilled) water as function of temperature (Celsius) using six-term Marczak equation. How to download and install cool edit pro 2 1 full crack Chetra HD Videos How to download and Instal Cool Edit Pro Free new full version (3 Top Audio. Cool Edit Pro Full Crack allows you to manage sound filters with digital signal processing.
Keygen words and Phrases That Rhyme With "Roads": bodes, code's
Final Version - Start editing videos and turn your camera shots to amazing videos - Movie Edit Pro 2020 crack. For another $300, I could have purchased a new one. Download & Streaming: Audio Archive: Internet Archive. Softwares Free Download.
Crack download Soldier Front Speed Hack Source Codes, Soldier
Cool edit pro full version crack, Cool Edit Pro, VideoSpirit Pro, Cool Edit Like the 'e-e-e-editt' sound in songs by edIT? Cool Edit pro Crack is famous and useful software which is most commonly used for audio editing. House Breaks Up Landslide Destruction Erosion Hill Erodes, House Falls Down, Storm Aftermath, Avalanche Falls Down Hill, Caves in, demolition sounds, raze, tear down. Hillary Clinton's Support Erodes in National Poll.
Asmongold - Real Talk on 6.2, flying and more: wow
But I've posted quite a bit about Office hymns and other music since then. Shipping Weight: 12.6 ounces. This class is for anyone who has wondered what sound design is all about. Cool Edit Pro Crack with Serial Key.
SE2200A vs X1 - Home Recording forums
MAGIX Movie Edit Pro guides you through all aspects of video editing ranging from cutting and editing videos to burning them on DVD. Video editing for everyone! Sound edit pro 2 1 crack erodes. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic CC 2020 8.1 (x64) + Crack Microsoft Office Professional Plus Version 1812 (Build 8) 2020 Adobe Acrobat Pro DC v2019.010.20069 + Patch.
Cracked sony Cd Rw Crx210e1 Firmware
How To Clean Vinyl Records & Get Better Sound weblink. Studio 5000 View Designer. I can use it to mix and repair clicks and pops her and there. Cool edit pro full crack, Cool Edit Pro, VideoSpirit Pro, Cool Edit.
|1||Iskysoft itube Studio Crack + License Key (2020) – #||40%|
|2||Use luma keys in Final Cut Pro - Apple Support||39%|
|3||Studio 5000 logix designer download trend: Studio 5000||98%|
|4||China's moral challenge to the West's liberal democratic||27%|
|5||Shadowrun: Dragonfall - Director's Cut - Guide and||62%|
|6||Amazon.com: Rock Band 4 Pro-Cymbals Expansion Drum Kit||50%|
Miami Pedestrian Bridge, Part VIII - Engineering Failures
Please Login or Register. (PDF) Plagiarism Erodes Scientific Integrity https://guptimo.ru/download/?file=592. For example, an anti-IL-2 antibody will be conjugated with a bead to detect IL-2. It gives different charming module and much more.
WinISO Crack + Serial Keys 2020 (100% Working) – #
Latest Democracy GIFs https://guptimo.ru/download/?file=583. Results of crack for modelsim se 10.1 linux Free download software, Free Vi. 707MB nokia video converter factory pro 4.7 keygen ModelSim PE Student Edit. Requires someone with experience using somewhat sophisticated camera kit and video editing software. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Activation code november 18, 2020 by Ithaca Times
WaveMax Sound Editor Crack Full Version Free: Latest WaveMax Sound Editor Crack Full Version is a perfect choice if you need to editing and altering with soundtracks. Thread the through the barrel from either end and pull it through with whatever you want to squirt on the patch.
The ArtCAM Forum - Community help, support and advice for
It has many display effects. Manus should be entered as 'published by' on releases, even if it actually means it is published without a (known) publishing company. Podcasts: Free Audio: Free Download, Borrow and. They originally played hardcore punk, but soon expanded to play a wide variety of rock formats, including progressive rock, heavy metal, and mainstream rock 'n' roll.
We should only "teach" one novel/play/memoir per year, and should devote the rest of our time in ELA to differentiated instruction.
I believe these units of study are valuable for two primary reasons, and a few secondary ones. Primarily, if the novel is well chosen and well taught, your students get to experience the emotional journey of a great text, and can thereby help to expand, over time, the students' reading interests, without "force-feeding" them too many books they don't want to read. I also believe that they provide an excellent opportunity for discursive skill-building, due to the fairly repetitious nature of class discussions (quick aside: new teachers, don't discourage your students from making the same limited point other students have already made, no matter how infuriating it may be to you - especially when those students are EL).
Secondarily, with a well chosen text, students have opportunities to apply their literacy skills and conceptual knowledge "authentically" (pardon the buzzword - won't happen again). Likewise, they can attach deeper meaning to their reading through study and discussion of theme.
Now for a little personal context:
I teach in a district with mandated, semi-scripted curricula for math and ELA (although the degree to which you're held to the specifics and/or script of the curriculum depend on your school). Our ELA curriculum is fully "text-driven" - that is, we have four units of study that feature three or four core texts and one core novel, all ostensibly centered around a particular theme. In each unit, there are two districts mandated assessments that involve reading a new but ostensibly thematically linked text, answering four multiple-choice questions about that text (ostensibly aligned to the core standards/skills taught in the lessons preceding the assessment) and one open-ended response.
The curriculum, inasmuch as it does what it sets out to do, is okay. There are some lessons that are mostly good, and some that are mostly garbage. The texts are mostly good but a few are only okay. None are terrible, and most are slightly above grade level in terms of text complexity, with the lone exception being the first text of the year, which is a short, highly accessible biography with a text complexity about two grade-levels below ours. (I think starting the year with a short and significantly lower-level text is an excellent approach, by the way, as long as it's engaging.) The assessments are probably the low point, mostly due to the extreme volatility and lack of reliability in the data they yield, mainly due to their structure (although for a few of them the misaligned nature of the text and/or poorly phrased answer choices (god I hate poorly phrased answer choices) are also contributing factors).
These problems, however, have fairly easy workarounds, as long as your administrators are comfortable with you omitting some of the lessons, changing the objective and/or exit ticket of others, and not remotely adhering to the script. In other words, improving them.
A more difficult obstacle, and the main reason for my writing this post, is the underlying assumption that the AP-style approach to ELA, in which rigorous text-dependent questioning, discourse, and writing are the foundational tenets of the course, is the best approach to all students and all grades - or even that such an approach will best prepare students for those very AP courses upon which curricula like mine base their design.
My thesis is a simple one: ELA instruction up to the AP level (and including non-AP courses) should prioritize literacy over literature, and should approach the latter as a means to the former's end, rather than as its own telos.
Before I go on, I should put forth my operational definition of these terms: literacy is the ability to read texts, measured in terms of oral and silent fluency, literal comprehension, and inferential comprehension, against quantitative (e.g. Lexile) and qualitative (e.g. F&P) measures of text complexity.
Also, being cellphone-bound (and, admittedly, feeling a little lazy on this Saturday afternoon), I'm going to rely on anecdotal evidence to support my premise, and forego linking studies with "empirical" data backing it up, at least for now (note: I am very pro-data and pro data-driven argument, but if you are a teacher and you've ever read a "scientific" study on education, particularly the "methodology" section, you know how many uncontrolled variables there inevitably are with both the control groups and the dependent-variable groups, leading to a lot of unreliable data). Still, feel free to come at me with any data you think refutes the observations below. Anyways here are some of the things I've consistently noticed in my years teaching:
-Students' phonological, phonemic, decoding, and fluency skills erode in the years after they demonstrate a level of fluency at foundational levels. In other words, kids who test "out" of deliberate/direct fluency instruction by the end of, say, second grade - many of whom still remain relatively high performers for at least a few years after - lose much of their skill in syllabication and decoding by fifth grade, having "gotten by" on rapid word recognition alone for so long.
-Beginning usually in sixth or seventh grade, and continuing through high school and college and even into adulthood, students start to lose their appetite for independent reading. Kids who used to start a new independent reading book within hours of finishing their last become middle schoolers who independently read five or six books a year, and then high schoolers who don't read any.
-Students' literal comprehension skill growth begins to taper off in the upper elementary years, effectively plateauing by about 9th grade, with most of the growth in high school coming pretty much exclusively from increased vocabulary.
-Around the same time, students' literary analysis skills, as demonstrated through classroom discussion and the "content" portion of their essays (i.e., not accounting for grammar and syntax) seems to accelerate. They begin to describe characters and infer their feelings much more precisely; they recognize themes and often articulate the deeper messages of the books they read in class quite well.
This may sound like a perfectly reasonable tradeoff. In fact, much of the received wisdom of ELA effectively advocates for this: students need to be able to do rigorous (a term too often confused with "deep," by the way) thinking about texts; they need to develop clear arguments and support them with compelling evidence.
The problem is, they also need to be able to comprehend what the text is literally describing or explaining, too. And, I would argue, their need to be able to do that is greater than their need to understand texts. And, above all, their abilities in this area are, from what I have seen, lesser. Ask kids who have been sitting in a discourse-driven class reading Hamlet to tell you about the bigger themes in the text and, assuming a decent teacher, they will respond convincingly. Ask the same kids to retell or summarize what happens/is said in a scene they haven't discussed yet, and I promise you'll be less convinced.
But of course, who cares? Why should a kid need to be able to comprehend an archaic text like Hamlet, or a more modern source of comprehension failure like Ulysses or Absalom! Absalom!? Aren't the deeper themes of those books really the whole point of reading them? Isn't it more important to use the books to develop kids' analytical and critical writing and discursive skills?
To an extent, the answer to all of these questions could reasonably be "Yes." That is the problem.
Try substituting the texts mentioned above with nonliterary/informational texts. Why should kids need to be able to comprehend a medical textbook, or an engineering textbook, or a computer science textbook? What about a paper about a new treatment for gioblastoma multiforme and its effectiveness? Or a CIA report on a resistance movement in Saudi Arabia? Or a geophysicist's survey? A legal brief? A multinational corporation's financials? Website user data?
Or, what about a political candidate's policy positions? A news article about Yemen? A scientific report on climate change?Discursively, the facts and arguments of a court case for which you are selected as a juror?
Obviously, all of these are niche, and nobody needs to be able to read all of those with full comprehension. But our world is one in which literal comprehension of complex, niche text is absolutely critical for nearly every high-paying career, to say nothing of our obligations as citizens of the most globally impactful country on earth.
In achieving those ends, traditional novel study is by no means useless. Great literature gives us wisdom; it exposes us to worlds we do not know and it opens us to ourselves; through a great book we can discover empathy and inspiration we may never have found otherwise.
But there is more value in reading than the deep stuff alone, and in my opinion, novel study is an extremely limited approach toward achieving real, flexible, continuous, and independent literacy. For reasons already stated, I believe doing one whole-grouo class novel per year is beneficial. Outside of that, I think ELA classes would benefit more from prioritizing the following:
-Independent reading time. As in, sacred, protected, nothing-else-happening independent reading of student-selected books. Successful implementation of this would require a good classroom and school library, strong systems for book checkout, reading-spot-selection, etc., as well as some direct instruction and lots of conferring around metacognitive skills and book selection. But the biggest thing is just carving out actual time for this, and not trying to combine it with things like guided reading or computer-based literacy activities. I think just about every ELA teacher believes independent reading is important, but it's so often shunted off to either a (usually unpopular) station of blended literacy/guided reading time, or out of the classroom altogether. If you don't make time for independent reading, what makes you think they will?
-Guided Reading: small groups of relatively homogeneous readers (as in, not just a "low" group of mainly, say 3rd-grade level readers, plus that one fully disfluent kid who reads at a Kindergarten level), reading high-interest texts a little above their independent reading levels, chosen either by the teacher or from a teacher-developed list. Here, too there should be a novel study at some point in the year, but most of the time should be spent doing actual reading, and then discussing what was just read, not hoping kids did the reading on their own, then summarizing, and then discussing big ideas. Articles, poems, and (very) short stories are ideal, but the focus should always be on literal and inferential comprehension, not analysis.
-Individualized foundational literacy skill and vocabulary development via teacher-vetted computer applications (e.g., Raz Kids, IStation, Lexia, IXL, etc.). Paper-based skill practice is not inherently invalid, but the combination of differentiation and immediate feedback on quality apps is hard to beat (just make sure you have an effective monitoring system and plan out how, how often, when, and for how long the students will use each program).
-Small-group practice of "Focus" or "Readiness" standard types of skills. Think: summary, inference, main/central idea, author's purpose, theme, etc. Really, all of this is about rigor: text-dependent questions and evidence-based responses. I think this ought to include about 5-10 minutes daily of guided practice and 10-15 minutes daily of closely monitored independent practice with feedback. For this, the goal is not comprehension growth, per se, but rigorous thinking and analytical skill development, so using previously-read or read-aloud texts is fine - just make sure the kids are able to spend the practice time working on the skill, not just reading the text. In my experience, this is what most whole-group instruction looks like, but the nature of whole-group usually screws up the pacing for everyone toward either end of the ability level spectrum. Smaller groups would let you apply the skills in appropriately challenging texts for all students and allow them to engage with peers of similar ability and work through questions at an appropriate pace.
-Small-Group written composition, through the full writing process. This seems to be one of the least differentiated areas of instruction, and yet it seems to issue the loudest call if all for differentiation. In my fourth-grade class, some kids can hand-write write two pages, single-spaced, with a little direct instruction to start, in about 30 minutes of independent work time. Others will, in that same time, kinda sorta finish a single sentence I've started for them, and then wait for me to come back and start the next one, no matter how long it may take for me to get there.
-Small-Group grammar and mechanics practice, in which grammar skills taught in whole-group lessons are practiced through the intentional diagramming, correcting/revising/editing, and construction of sentences. This, too, would follow a guided practice -> monitored independent practice format.
-Whole group "lesson cycle" lessons on "Supporting" standards types of skills/concepts. Think genres, point-of-view, fact-opinion, literary devices, types of figurative language, etc., as well as basic concepts in grammar and mechanics. Basically, all of the ELA skills/concepts that you could effectively "teach" through direct instruction, guided practice, and monitored independent practice, and of which you could meaningfully assess mastery through exit tickets and quizzes.
I am probably forgetting something, but here's the part that's already pretty clear: even this, without a novel study, is logistically impossible. If you are able to get two hours of protected ELA time in a standard school day, you're long the luckier set. And, truth be told, there is almost no way you'll be able to hit all of those targets every day even if you had 3 hour classes. Plus, the planning would be nightmare. Assembling one day's copies/materials alone would take as much time as planning a whole lesson.
But imagine this: you only teach one whole-group lesson per week, and it's about an hour long. You start the year with genres, then grammar, then mechanics, then the rest of the literary "knowledge" stuff, and finish with your class novel. You give weekly quizzes, alternating between standards-level reading assessments (for tracking overall performance growth and identifying conceptual knowledge gaps) and concept/skill-specific mastery quizzes, along with a monthly individualized reading growth assessment.
This would commit you to about two hours per week. Imagine if the rest of your time was devoted entirely to meeting kids where they are, rather than where the book you or your district have/has chosen needs them to be, and teaching/coaching/guiding/growing them as readers, and not just as understanders of your class's text!
As ELA teachers, we often place too much emphasis on whichever text we happen to be reading, usually to the neglect of overall reading growth, particularly in middle and high school, when we should instead put overall growth front and center, and limit long-form class-texts to one unit per year. Likewise, we should teach fewer whole-group lessons, and limit our use of that approach to the kinds of concepts that kids can actually learn in a day and of which they can reliably demonstrate mastery through an exit ticket or quiz.
Sorry, my doctor upped my Vyvanse dose this week. Might need to scale back.
Digital Recordings vs analog
so Been listening to The 00-09 output a fair amount. Much to be made about lifestyles, members and an eroding industry (as in the music biz wiz)
But fuck... these albums have great moments but maybe the appeal, the vibe that’s missing is that they were all made on pro tools? I remember reading about Standing from a guitar world in my hs library in like 1999 and Noel said something to the extent of ‘we used pro tools soon everyone else will too’
... not here to draw straws about the songs themselves from earlier works And oddly both Noel and Liams solo albums really vibe great in the digital realm
But take ‘Dont believe’ It’s so compressed and rigid It sounds like it was made with a fucking iron! (s/o dual disc) It’s like if H&M won a culture war. Not knocking the songs or even Andy Bell - But was just thinking about the digital era and how it hasn’t suited one. Not one - ‘analog era artist’ (except bowie of course)
Does anyone know of be here now was digital? It doesn’t feel that way
Also s/o Standing on the Shoulder of Giants I feel like that had a strong 01010101’s element but still maintained the vibe It was also Sonically wayyy ahead of it’s time (respect to Spike Stent)
If anyone is still reading this can someone link me with outtakes etc? Would love to hear more of the process