'm confused...a simple text message or wall post that says "I love you" or "Wish you were here"...that simple, wordless hug when both our worlds are shattering from the inside out...
At those times, I realize that it's your fingertip moments are the ones that stick with me the longest.
The ones that mean the most.
The ones that changed my life.
There is [a] friend in the life of each of us who seems not a separate person, however dear and beloved, but an expansion, an interpretation, of one's self, the very meaning of one's soul. ~Edith Wharton
=) <3 Love youSWBAT use their problem solving skills to solve problems with radicals with different pieces of given information.
This Warm Up is intended to take about 10 minutes. I will not assess this Warm Up. I have purposely chosen two problems that may give my students difficulty. The level of challenge in this Warm Up will help students in the next activity, when we work on Posters in small groups of 4-5 students.
The problems on the posters are meant to reinforce applying adding and subtracting radicals learned in the previous lesson. However, one of the problems on poster five requires some knowledge of multiplying or squaring radicals using the Pythagorean Theorem. Therefore, the problems I select for this Warm Up should help them get started on the problem.
After reviewing the Warm Up, I start randomly numbering heads for the Poster Activity. I count to 4 or 5 before starting over, depending on the number of students in the class. For a class of 30, I need six groups, so I count to 5. Like numbers are grouped together, and I have to be careful of students not going to the correct group. Students spend about 4 minutes at each poster before I instruct them to the number that follows. The group at poster six, moves to one.
A goal of this activity is for students to learn from each other, while working in collaborative groups. Each group will rotate from one problem to the next about every four minutes. I number heads for this activity from one to four or five depending on the number of students in class. Like numbers are placed in the same group.
There are six posters that each group will rotate between.
Poster 1 asks, "Which one does not belong?" Three of the expressions when completely simplified equals twelve square root of six minus twenty-nine square root of two. Expression number three does not belong because it is given as twenty-nine square root of two minus twelve square root of six.
Poster 2 requires students to simplify two radical terms to like radicals and completely simplify.
Poster 3 requires students to simplify three radical expressions. Two of the terms combine because they are like radicals when simplified, and the third one is not when completely simplified.
Poster 4 requires students to find the perimeter of a rectangle given the width and length are radical expressions.
Poster 5 begins with the problem that I model in the Warm Up, using Pythagorean Theorem. After the side of the third side of the triangle is found, students are instructed to find the perimeter of the triangle.
Poster 6 is a multi-step problem. Students first have to evaluate the distance a person can see from two different heights. Then the students are are instructed to find the difference of those distances.
After the Poster Activity, Students walk around and observe the posters for the last five minutes of class on a Gallery Walk. I ask students to complete a Reflection sheet as they are walking around that they hand in to me. I want to see what problems that they had difficulty on, and what problems that they were more confident.United Kingdom Prime Minister Theresa May visits Florence, Italy to deliver speech. Photo by Number 10.
Theresa May’s speech in Florence, Italy was billed as the announcement of a bold new Brexit strategy, but Dahrendorf Forum Working Group Co-Chair Kevin Featherstone was left cold.
Listening to Theresa May’s speech in Florence, I was left wondering whether she had planned to say more but was stopped from doing so by her warring cabinet yesterday. After all, this was heralded as a speech that would set out a bold new vision for the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the European Union. The superlatives had been flowing for the last couple of weeks as to how it would take the negotiations forward. And the very idea of making the speech outside the UK seemed consistent with her taking a daring new step, without risking an immediate hostile reaction from a home audience.
In reality, the Prime Minister’s speech offered very little that would take the Brexit negotiations forward at this point. There was the expected statement on the UK honouring its budget payments so that none of our partners would have to pay more or lose out in the current EU budget period – which lasts until 2020, a year after the UK is to leave. But the PM dodged the question as to whether the UK would be prepared to pay for continued single market access thereafter. Platitudes were repeated on protecting the rights of EU citizens in the UK and avoiding a new Irish border.
Instead, what Theresa May said seemed to be what her cabinet had allowed her to say. Had the PM – caricatured as ‘robotic’ – been planning to go further, but had her navigation system terminated? We may not know for some time.
The speech seemed more designed to make progress at home. It was a composite of compromises worked out in the cabinet. As such, it was a mix of the delusional and the educational. The PM again recognised that access to the single market rested on accepting its full obligations. Going beyond earlier ambiguities, she now said the UK would not be part of the customs union. Explicitly, neither the Norwegian nor Canadian models would suit the UK, nor, it now seems, would that of Turkey. And, yet, she would expect the UK to be able to trade with the EU without there being any tariffs. In reality, she seems not to be rejecting the Canada model, but seeking to broaden it. The Canadian deal offers little on services, precisely the sectors where the UK has an advantage with the EU27. Beyond this lack of clarity of models, though, there still seemed to be a cake-and-eat-it optimism that will no doubt irk the EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier.
The speech may help to educate a domestic audience on some aspects. Asked whether Brexit voters might feel let down by a transition that would delay full withdrawal, she responded quite rightly that a phased implementation period was best for all sides, to avoid the costs of a disorderly Brexit – though she rather undermined her own argument here when she repeated the claim that ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’.
An opportunity was clearly missed by the PM. It is difficult to see how this speech will progress the negotiations in Brussels. Can this PM redefine the agenda and make a breakthrough? That now seems to depend on the lurking shadows back home of Boris Johnson and others waiting to wrest control. Next time Theresa May is said to be setting out a new way forward, will we believe the hype or just check back with her rivals?
Kevin Featherstone is Head of the European Institute at LSE and Co-Chair of the Dahrendorf Working Group on “The Future Of European Governance”.Hardly anyone in the United States should wish for that. However, Washington needs to be careful. It is normal for military men to remain watchful and always be prepared for the worst, i.e. an enemy attack. It is equally important, however, to make sure that one’s own allies— either out of hubris, like Georgia’s former president Mikheil Saakashvili in 2008, or out of desperation, such as a Ukrainian government fearful of losing control of the country at some point in the future—do not jump the gun, expecting the United States to rush in to defend them. Prime Minister Yatsenyuk has made a habit of saying the Ukrainians are fighting for Western civilization. This time, the miscalculation could have much more serious consequences than what happened in South Ossetia.
ARIES (March 21-April 19): “Love can’t always do work,” wrote novelist Iris Murdoch. “Sometimes it just has to look into the darkness.” From what I can tell, you’ve been doing that recently: looking into the darkness for love’s sake. That’s a good thing! You have been the beneficiary of the blessings that come through the contemplation of mysteries and enigmas. You’ve been recalibrating your capacity to feel love and tenderness in the midst of uncertainty. I suspect that it will soon be time to shift course, however. You’re almost ready to engage in the intimate work that has been made possible by your time looking into the darkness.
TAURUS (April 20-May 20): Author Barbara Kingsolver says, “Don’t try to figure out what other people want to hear from you; figure out what you have to say.” That’s always valuable advice, but it’ll be especially useful to keep in mind during the coming weeks. You’re probably going to feel more pressure than usual to tell others what they wish you would tell them; you may experience some guilt or worry about being different from their expectations of you.  So you might as well say and do exactly what’s real and genuine.
GEMINI (May 21-June 20): “The violets in the mountains have broken the rocks,” wrote playwright Tennessee Williams. I think that’s a poetic but accurate description of the feat you’ve been working on lately, Gemini. You’re gently smashing through stony obstructions