Jourdan Smoot Blogs

1. Adolescent Literacy Article: This article was enjoyable to read. I really liked the opening demographic statement. "...a recent study of writing instruction reveals that 40% of high school seniors never or rarely write a paper of three or more pages, and although fourth and eighth graders showed some improvement in writing between 1998 and 2000, the scores of 12 graders showed no significant change." That is astounding. Looking back at my high school portfolio however, I am not sure why I am so shocked. I never wrote papers more than three or four pages on average. I know I did a six and a seven page paper, but I do not believe on average I was asked to write any more than that, and I was enrolled in the accelerated academic program. I have no idea what the standard was/is for other classrooms. The second page was also setup pretty nicely. I like the myth and reality section, because I think they are so true, especially the first one about how literacy is thought to be just reading. Even I have said that I am more a composition person than a literacy individual, when literacy is writing and reading. I feel that this article really hits the nail on the head on page four. there is a bullet point that talks about motivating students to read. This is probably the most difficult aspect of literacy for adolescents and honestly the part of myself as a future teacher that I will struggle with tremendously. English Teacher Wake Up Call: When I read these articles, I always try and think from my personal accounts in schools, along with my views as a future teacher. When reading this article, I found myself thinking backwards more than thinking forwards, and I am still unclear whether this is a positive reaction or not. On page two, the author says, "There was a time when the English Teacher and the Reading Teacher were two very different people." I started thinking back to middle school, the last time reading and English were separated. I remember having a wonderful reading teacher and just an alright English teacher. I never questioned once I grew older what happened to those separations. Why do we even have those separations? I remember writing just as much in my reading class as I did in my English class. We did all of the same activities so why keep them apart? Especially talking about literacy outside of the classroom, I remember all of our teachers trying to get us to read different books in our spare time and I never wanted to. How can I try to get future students of mind to want to read outside of class when at their age I never did? If I was there age, all of my literacy would be coming from Facebook,

Twitter, and Pinterest, none of which are all that educational. Not only do we have to get these students to read different novels, poems, and short stories that we don't want them to, we have to take the extra effort to motivate them to want to read. I make an argument with myself wondering how I can argue with something that I used to justify to myself. 2. "Reading for All Students" The world is changing, regardless if we are ready for it to or not. This article really brought out the finer points in today's changing societies. When my generation of classmates and I were in school, reading was sometimes a very daunting, boring task. I remember being in elementary school and trying to read some of the short stories or even when we hit some of those novels how sincerely bored I was. Not only was I not engaged in the reading, but the Pokemon magazines and the Captain Underpants comics that I was reading were not considered reading. Why? Why are the obscurities that I found enjoyable, and to this day still do, not considered a part of reading by the standards of some of today's teachers? The article says, "Students who develop expertise with a particular kind of reading - science fiction or online video games for example - outside of school may not think this kind of reading will be valued by their teachers." Why do teachers not consider these particular forms of reading not feasible? I'm not sure if those teachers have sat down to play a game of Skyrim, because they would learn more in an hour than four years at an accredited university. "Situating the Conversation" Not to be unprofessional, but did anyone else see the part where Jassar made a myspace page? Thought that was funny. Anyways, Jassar's story really relates back to the point I was reiterating in my rant in the other article. Teachers are still not seeing the bigger picture to reading. Since these students are not reading what the schools or the states would like them to blindly read, they believe they aren't getting a proper education. This isn't necessarily true. I love the quote that says, "Jassar is vibrantly literate in ways that are purposeful and important..." I thought that was brilliant. That is a firm belief of mine in terms of literacy. Why are we having students read some of this literature and these multitude of texts if they won't use them in life. I'm going to be kicked out of the English major society for this, but why do we teach students about Shakespeare in depth as we do? Why do we shove sonnets and rhythmic patterns down the throats of students? In this every changing world, we should really consider what is VITALLY important to the growth and professional development of our students. We need to teach them things that they themselves will use in the big kid world known as adult hood.

3. Annotated Bibliography: So, I'm going to be completely honest and say that I didn't read the annotated bib, but that was because I'm not sure what I am looking for. I opened it up and skimmed through some of the descriptions of the books, but I guess I wasn't really sure what exactly we were supposed to be going for. So i'm sorry about that. Adolescent Literacy: I really like in the introduction when she writes, "They write for self-expression." This goes back to earlier blogs about what we consider to be literacy. When students write blogs, status updates, or even tweet isn't that considered a form of self-expressed writing, so therefore couldn't that be considered literacy? Especially with the fact that the kids go through and read other blogs and tweets and statuses. Isn't this considered reading and not just reading but reading comprehension, because take this tweet, "Can you believe she wore that outfit today? Did she not get the memo it was fall? #skank #subtweet" Not only are these students using context clues to infer that it's not longer summer, but that they think of all of the students this could apply to and use inference to make an educated guess based solely on the words around it. Even in the article she talks about how literacy is a communicative practice. That is her definition of literacy...a communication. I also found it very interesting that on page 120 of her article she says that the popular belief is that students do not read for enjoyment, but actually 92% of 716 youth interviewed said they read some kind of text outside of school three to four times a week. These 716 youth were also from what could be considered a high poverty neighborhood. This just goes to show that we do not all have a collective idea of literacy and we do not have a colloquial understanding of the REAL problem. 4. Multiculturalism and Censorship: Okay, first off, I thoroughly enjoy the title of this PDF and it made me giggle. The bold heading off to the side says, "For multiculturalism to be effective, it must be perceived and conceived as a social movement, involving an understanding of power as well as concurrent ideologies and counter-ideologies, application of principles of change process, and development of action strategies." What I'm taking from this quote, is that infusing culture into the classroom is very much like the writing process. You take it in strides. To perceive multiculturalism and conceive multiculturalism as a social movement, we need to recognize it in the classroom. We need to see the vast cultures not just in race or background, but also in gender, social class, and other multifaceted outlets. The article also brings up a heated issue in the classrooms, discussing the topic of Christ, and other biblical references in the educational system. Personally, I am not equipped with enough knowledge to really make a stance, one way or another on the subject, but I will say that English is a very hard subject to try and teach without

referencing the Bible, Jesus Christ, or the Devil in some way, shape, or form. Many authors use biblical and religious innuendos in their works, which are a core part of the canon used in the classrooms. I would like to think that teachers have the skill and mindset that they can teach these works to multicultural students with a variety of religious and nonreligious backgrounds. What Happens When a High School Censors: Reading the first page, I feel sorry for the teacher. Gaining student trust and understanding is vital, especially at a twelfth grade level. These students are not stupid, by an stretch of the imagination, so when he had to lie to them and say that the course was just taking a different direction, the students knew better. Plus, now the students now know that the teacher lied to them, so what else could he lie about? I guess what confuses me is the part when the teacher was allowed to teach the play that had other curse words in them and the administration said it was okay to teach. Why is the term 'goddamn' okay to teach but the word 'fuck' is not okay? I guess it's okay to take the Lord's name in vain, but an African American poet writing about oppression and using 'fuck' in the work is not alright. Guess I'm still learning this whole teaching thing. Celebrate Democracy: I love the Banned Books Week. I think it is super funny and bad ass, but I am not so sure I'm brave enough to use it. I guess I am also slightly confused with the Banned Books. Are these books that can possibly be considered to be banned in the classroom, but aren't yet? So therefore the teacher is having them read them before they are banned? I will say that I like the idea of reading a book, and then making different groups to argue different cases for the book. So this strategy can be used in my own classroom. I can have the students be reading and after breaking into groups give each of them a point to argue to try and 'beat' the other groups. I feel this could help students really think outside the normal realm of thinking. I also found it ironic that on the Reasons why a Book may be Banned or or Challenged one of them said Books promoting critical thinking, which is ironic because I'm pretty sure for the English Language Arts Reading portion of content standards this is something that must be hit in the classroom. I may be getting it confused with something else though. A Battle Reconsidered: I really like the opening of this work. The Buddha story and perspective is extremely interesting, to me anyways. According to the article, this teacher was being forced to back up her reasoning to have the students read many of the books that I myself read in high school. Now although I did not read "Catcher in the Rye" I did read "Lord of the

Flies" and the fact that she had to fight to keep this book in the classroom is a joke. First off, if anyone who hasn't read this book doesn't want it spoiled for you then do not read the rest of my post. In "Lord of the Flies" there are so many hidden messages and symbolic meaning, not to mention its a damn good story, but as I sat here to rethink about the book, what exactly was so bad about it? Yes, there was a little violence and a murder. If I remember correctly, it was Piggy they murdered, which caused another mass outbreak of everyone trying to murder one another, but the only person who actually was killed by another human was Piggy, right? The beauty in that book is to show what exactly would happen in that situation; it shows true human characteristics, and I absolutely loved that book. Mind you, it's been a hot second since I've read it, but I really don't remember it being that bad? I'm pretty sure these kids see wore and definitely hear worse profanity and indecency in the hallways of the school they are trying to protect. I guess I do not understand people sometimes. 5. Standards VS Standardization: Although it could be my horrible weekend clouding my judgement, I really found this article to be very dry, and somewhat boring. I say this, but at the same token, the author raises some valid points. I really liked the sentence on page 11, "We came to realize that literacy...required not only the ability to decode and comprehend, but also to dry upon and use higher-order thinking skills; to critically analyze the meanings one makes, to question one's own interpretations and conclusions as well as those of others and to situate understanding in relation to multiple contexts and issues." If I understand this right, literacy is more than just decoding and comprehending. This was my main revelation in literacy lately. I thought that if you could simply read a text and comprehend the meaning or answer questions correctly, then you can be labeled literate. This text is saying there are a plethora of different outlets that students need to be able to comfortable do in order to say they understand a text. Confessions: Maybe I am too early into my learning to be this, but in the narrative that the author gives on page 2, when the parent asks what are you doing specifically to benefit my child, I guess I am at a loss for words. What exactly is the parent looking for? I think its very interesting that parents are so quick to jump on the throats of teachers and ask for this specialized attention. Don't parents realize that teachers are people too? I think its really crappy for a parent to expect so much out of a teacher, because it is their child. Teachers have to deal with hundred of students, and its very ignorant to think they can pay super close attention to every single student that walks through their door. I also must say I like this author's approach to the work, because presenting a case through a fictional dream is interesting. I couldn't tell you the number of work dreams I've had,

which made this very easy to relate to. This article brings up valid points, because as teachers we are assessing aspects like literature, writing, and grammar, but how are we helping these students as readers to grow? very interesting. Kelly: May I just say I love the word readicide, because not only is it painfully true, but it's super funny. Sometimes reading this stuff really gets to me because I am that student. I am that student who says, "I have other things I would rather do in my spare time than read." I'm worried that I am eventually going to negatively reinforce my students about bad conotations with reading. I also liked how Kelly said she isn't against standards, because they help teachers mold their teachers for the year. This is really awesome to hear someone say, because lately everything that I have been reading and learning about standards have not been positive. I also really enjoyed when she is talking about how little teachers can really get into their content. Due to the fact there are so many different standards to cover in a given content, how in depth can a teacher really go to ensure that students will be at least semi-covered for the testing in the spring. Especially when some of the content is very descriptive, such as, "...relate the moral and ethical principle in ancient Greek and Roman philosophy, in Judaism and in Christianity to developmental of the Western political thought" I have students in my junior block who can barely type, let alone be fully equipped in moral and ethical principle. 6. Chapter 1: The first chapter sets up the author and his initial start into the video game world. Beginning by playing through the video games his son played, James Paul Gee found video games to be intellectually stimulate and very entertaining. He decided to try some 'adult' video games to gain a further range of experience. He started finding out some interesting aspects to video games that he had not previously considered such as the Darwinian tones to these games not only for the players, but also the manufactures of these games. He also explains that different games involve different sets of learning, similar to how different subjects require different thinking in order to learn about them. The author is not making a claim that every person should go and attempt to play video games, because that is unreasonable and silly. Chapter 2: Chapter two talks about the different social practices of literacy. Each different form of literacy required different social aspects to comprehend the ideological philosophy. This is especially true for the different types of video games that people play. We must think in 'semiotic' mind sets, which means signs. This is not just the dictation of words, but the connotation behind them. What does this word stand for? I believe another big take

away from this chapter is my own personal bias for me beliefs. I enjoy video games, in particular RPGs and shooter games. Due to my enjoyment, I will be more likely to be okay with violence and have stronger opinions on how they are used within the game. Chapter 2 also discusses how we know what counts as an internal design and an X terminal design. If we can look at in modern piece of art in consciously or unconsciously know that it is a modern piece we have internally thought about that. But if all we know how to do is look at something from the exterior and now then we are using our external cognitive thinking. The same idea goes into the video game process anybody can watch video games and know if it's a first person shooter game however we must be able to decipher if it is actually a first-person shooter game internally in the conscious mind. It takes a nice combination of both external and internal gamers in order to set up a video games. The authors example of the game. I K am I and is very similar to the game Angry Birds which we all know. Each bird is designed to do different things in order to help you pass each level. As the human playing the game we must recognize these advantages and disadvantages to help us cognitively figure out how to pass these levels. This type of situation can be used in classrooms easily. Within the internal design of the game the game complex system of interrelated parts engages children and even manipulates students into certain ways of thinking this metalevel thinking about the game is specifically designed to engage the brain such thinking can open up a critique of the game it can also lead to not novel moves and strategies sometimes the ones that the game makers never anticipated this is a prime example of critical learning and thinking that schools yearn. Chapter 3: Chapter 3 discusses video games and how they make the players for identities. These identities make students work and reflect on these identities and clear and powerful ways if schools worked in similar ways as video games and learning in school would be more successful and powerful because it would be engaging and interactive. The author describes the different personalities of characters in the video games. You must know and understand these different personalities in order to flourish in the game. This is something that could be carried over into school curriculums. Video games allow for what is called psychosocial moratorium that is a learning space in which the learner can take risks where real world consequences are lowered. The author suggests that in schools they should use projected identities. If learners are to take on projected identities in an example of the science classroom, they must come to project their own values and desires. For each different type of learning there is another identity that must be enveloped. Chapter 4:

One of the main points that the author makes in chapter 4 is the idea of creativity. All of the videogames he mentions have different alternate outcomes. Based on what you do and one part of the game affects the other Indenes to the game. For example he brings in again and talks about the three different endings that could happen. As the virtual player you must pick one and then the game ends. This is a good simulation that can be used in different techniques in your curriculum in the school classroom. We have to keep in mind that there are reasons why the stories in video games are not being studied. Stories and books and movies have deeper richer context then videogames. The game carries out conversations by giving the player a choice among several different things. Books and movies when it those options. Throughout chapter 4 the author gives different examples of video games in the other benefit packages that come along with the games. Typically with first person shooter games they have a pamphlet that explains all of the different moves buttons in places located throughout the videogame. For example in Skyrim there is a foldable map that is kept inside of the videogame that a player can use throughout their endeavors in the game. 7. Chapter 5: The author is telling us about the Laura Croft tomb raider videogame. In this video game it is essential that the player disobeys the rules and regulations of the main character. They play a 16-year-old girl and instead of following directions they must look elsewhere and explore ancient tombs in order to beat the game. This is a very interesting point that the author is bringing up. Could this be a valid question as to whether or not videogames are good ideas for children? Why would we want our children to deliberately disobey adults? The author goes on to explain that the game is set up for the player to have certain interactions and attitudes toward certain characters within the game. I find this extremely interesting, because I had never thought of it that way. If you deliberately disobeyed the professor in the tomb raider game, very often you'll find hidden treasure. This is showing positive reinforcement for wrong behavior. The author also mentions that sometimes other characters throughout the game will tell you to jump push press up or X other things that the character you are playing could not do. Yes as the controller of the player we can perform these so sometimes the fourth wall is broken. I had never thought about that. Most of the time I thought they were helpful hints and I never looked too much into it. It is also interesting that some of these other players are instructing you what to do. And perhaps this is a well planned method that some teachers could possibly implement. I enjoy the way the author writes this: a good video game adapts to the level of the player, rewards different players differently but reward them all, and often stays at the edge of the players regime of competence (122). The next section the author talks about when the player realizes they are actually learning something. Take Pokmon for example. When you get to the end of the game

you must battle the elite four. These elite for you must be one after another after another after another. You cannot go back and you cannot quit once you start you must finish. Therefore if you go and you fail you must start at the beginning; however now you have knowledge of which Pokmon you would like to use. If you know the first trainer will have grass type thing you present your fire type Pokmon first. Your Pokmon will take on little damage and will be ready for the next battle. You are learning as the game progresses. You know what is expected of you throughout the rest of the game. You are learning. Chapter 6: Just for the sake of argument, the author titles chapter 6 cultural models: do you want to be the blue sonic or the dark sonic? I do not even know why this is a question you pick the dark sonic 1200 times out of the thousand turns. Anyways, the authors starts out this chapter by saying, "one of the things that makes video games so powerful is their ability to create whole world an invite players to take on various identities within them when players do this, two things can happen: on one hand, there presuppose perspectives on the world might be reinforced" (145). The author starts to talk about our views of good and evil, and what better way to exploit our perspectives then through video games. Most of the time we play through one perspective of our characters. But every so often we may choose to either place for the good team or the bad team; however many times the bad teams goal is really not that bad. For example in sonic tennis, you may choose to either beat the good sonic or the bad sonic shadow or blue sonic. Most of the time I choose the play shadow, the bad sonic, however this sonic and the other sonic have the same goals in mind to win the tennis match. So is shadow really that evil? In my personal opinion no. You can choose to be good or bad but the outcomes are the same. There are a few games out there that make your character the bad guy, one example that came to mind and that came to mind the author was the video game grand theft auto. The goal of the game is to get in with the gang and you do this by shooting other games and killing other people stealing cars etc. in no way shape or form is this guy ever a good guy but this is your character so the author makes an interesting claim on what we perceive as good and bad. And grand theft auto we are all going through the same target but the target and getting there are very irresponsible and bad situations to be in. Another interesting example of perspective the author is our video games about September 11. Many video game designers have created videogames featuring US soldiers killing a Rabbs and Muslims. These obviously our offensive to any Muslim a Rab or any children of the sort. But then a videogame publishing house designed a video game called under Ash in which the hero is A young Palestine in named Ahmed who throw stones the bye is really soldiers and settlers. The game is made to cause harm to who we CS allies. This could cause some upset amongst Americans. This is all about perspective and culture. The author made a point to say that when the American culture created video games killing a Rabbs nobody in the Arabian countries were upset. But

when the video game under Ash came out killing Americans, the US had a highly upset reaction. The author told a story about an expert gamer who turned his game from easy to expert so he could try to beat the top boss at the end of the game. After 20 minutes of battling in the end the expert lost. His response was a lot of cursing when he died but he also had a big smile on his face. "in video games, losing is not losing in the point is not winning easily or judging yourself a failure." Many schools need to have this mentality: do not label yourself a failure. Chapter 7: I think it's an interesting point in chapter 7 when he talks about how others socially play video games. For the most part, nowadays, many people play over the Internet on Xbox or their computer or a PlayStation three. Yes we can still all playing the same room which I believe would be the second most used tool to play together, however I do not believe this is the mainstream way to play with your friends. He also talks about probably the dumbest aspect of video games, people using real money to make their characters better. I know that certain armor weapons and other magical elements can be virtually bought with real money. Some items can even BS expensive as $2-$3000, and I will never understand buying something that ridiculous for something that you can't even tangibly possess. He also talks about how the human mind is built to recognize patterns. So this element is helpful when ever we are trying to connect items together. He said for example to think of the bedroom. Often times of people think of a bedroom they will put a window a bag pillow in sheets. This is pattern recognition. He says this can also happen with people. However we must be careful in the fact that patterns lead to stereotypes which can be harmful and hurtful. The author continues throughout chapter 7 to talk about some of the different ways he had to quote sheet in order to be games. He used his own skill in order to win, but he did have to you get some help. He also talks about different methods for different useful teaching strategies in classrooms that he had already mentioned in previous chapters. This was hard to read for a third time. Chapter 8: This is the concluding chapter of the book, so I believe the author will just basically summarizes points throughout each chapter. He claims that many people who read the book claim this book is trying argue to have video games in schools. He said this was not his intent of writing the book. He said that video games build their designs with very solid learning principles and that we should implement the principles without videos or with a permissible in order for deeper learning with and schools workplaces and other

sixties. The author is making the claim that video games ensure deeper more fond learning that can be used with in schools. He gives a couple Pages of what he considers to be good solid game. Video games offer players strong identities in the ability to be creative. Games often have different difficulty levels and good games allow problems to be solved in multiple ways. Games should feel doable but also challenging. Games encourage players to think about relationships. Games should recruit and distribute strong knowledge and skills. 8. This blog and my next one will be highly informal, just a warning. I would like to start off by apologizing on the lateness of this blog, because I didn't think we needed one, but here it is. We just recently finished our annotated bibliography. Honestly, I am just at an okay with our topic as a whole. My biggest issue with some of our sources is their 'definition' of a video game. I was reading one of the sources, and I couldn't help but get a little frustrated with the author. The author was trying to talk about using video games in a foreign language classroom, which I agree with. Why would I have a problem with an article that is for my cause? First off, their definition of video game is highly incorrect. They were arguing for technology to be incorporated into the classroom, not video games. I will admit that my bias towards the article skewed my perception, and the chances are likely I misinterpreted the article, but here is the general idea I got from it. The article gave an example of this 'video game' with a cartoon. The cartoon was showing, pictures obviously, with slight dialogue. At the end of the cartoon, students had to click out of the multiple choices with dialogue would fit best with the article. Do not get me wrong, this type of learning strategy could be beneficial in the classroom, but this is under no rights a video games. This is merely a tool to help students engage in their languages and use context clues to help figure out the answer. I believe James Paul Gee would agree with me, because his definition of a video game and mine are very similar, in my opinion. I was highly upset by this article, which really disappointed me. The second article that I had to read was a complete 180 from the first article. This second article actually mention James Paul Gee, which really made me happy, because that is an easy connection to the text. Secondly, they used examples of ACTUAL VIDEO GAMES. I was so relieved to see someone talk about something that proved insightful, but also stood for the same side I did. If I remember correctly, I believe his name was Richard Williams, or something like that. He talked about how their is one charter school for elementary students that has their curriculum completely surrounded by video games. They even have video game designers come in to help mold their curriculum and the teachers and administrators would help with the units and standards. I just think that would be extremely fascinating to see their progress and how the students take to this sort of haptic learning style. 9. So, here is the final update on the group project, until we do our group presentation. First off, I am very pleased with the research and the work we did. I was extremely happy that we divided everything equally and evenly, because I would have been upset if one of us was dominating and everyone else did nothing. I know that doesn't happen as much in this level, but it is still nice to have a group that worked so well together. Not that the other group didn't, I just know that we did. I also thought our topic as a whole

was interesting. I do have to say though, this was extremely difficult to do as a group. I would like a book review style essay, but I have not ever done a collaboration of any sort on any other type of paper. This was really hard to not only get together all at once except in class. Plus, everyone has their own writing style. I'm not trying to say the finished product isn't nice, but I feel like if we had each done our own, separate work, the reviews might be formatted differently. I would have like to seen half of the class do a book review on one text, and the other on another, but then all of us write our own book review and then maybe do a collaborative annotated bibliography. If we are being honest, no one likes annotated bibs, and the fact we could split it up and knock it out was FANTASTIC. Yet, in the case of my own writing, every time I sit down to write something, it is at odd times of the day, and at my own pace. Especially if the assignment is something that I had never done before, such as this one, I would like to have learned how to attack it myself first instead of relying on others. These are just personal opinions, and I cannot stress enough how happy I am with the product and my group. I believe these ladies did an amazing job, and if anything I didn't contribute enough to their hard work. I don't want anyone to think I am attacking them. I just think that I work better on my own, and I have always been that way. Sorry if anyone took this the wrong way. Everyone is a star in the shining sky of hope. Something like that... =] 10. So, I'm not sure what exactly we are supposed to blog about for tomorrow's class, so I am just going to talk about the two things that we have coming up, our group presentation and our final presentation and probably a little bit about life. I'm making ACE my personal diary. Group Presentation: So as we were collaborating on what to do for our group presentation, it seems obvious that we would discuss the controversy around video games in the classroom or design our own, but sometimes I feel like maybe we can do more. No we mentally cannot be asked to do much more, because my brain is so fried I could cook raw eggs on it, but I wish that things might have gone a little differently for this presentation. I hope that in tomorrow's class we really hammer out some issues and make our presentation actually interesting. Final Portfolio: So, last year I presented my journey in 465 through a portfolio by following the evolution of a Pokemon. This year, I am going for a similar approach, but also a little different. I just finished reading the series Divergent, which I highly recommend because it was really interesting. Anyways, the world is broken up into factions and each faction believes in a different system of things, such as abgnegation believes in acting selfless or acting on behalf of others. Basically I am breaking up each assignment in class and placing it within each of the factions and explaining why it helped me. I will also be

placing each of the students and Dr. B in different factions, so it will be a fun presentation. I hope you all enjoy it.