Thursday's speaker addressed the extremely important topic of the mental health of students. Too often we as educators ignore or are unaware of the overt and subtle messages we send to students and the effects that they have on students. We need to be especially conscious of how our actions and interactions with students shape the educational experiences of students both while we're working with them and down the line. I'm especially glad that today's speaker was very open minded about a number of issues. It seemed like the reading buddies responded more favorably. I think it was especially beneficial to everyone that she spoke practically about how to work with students. I hope the reading buddies learned skills that they'll be able to take with them into the classroom (and beyond).

The first speaker was helpful in stressing that people should be aware of their presence when working with children and the effects that it has on them. It is always important to think about how we interact with children. It seems that many people who work with children and set policies affecting children do not do this enough.

The second speaker seemed to focus a great deal on theoretical principles. I think a more practical approach to his discussion would have been more helpful to a group that was preparing to go into classrooms and work with children. He seemed to have a number negative viewpoints. While he is certainly entitled to his perspective, he failed to offer any constructive suggestions on how these matters could otherwise be approached in ways that would be both positive and effective.

Based on my experience as a reading intervention teacher, the best approach is to have a number of tools and techniques available and to use what works best. Don't be stuck in a single mindset, thinking that one way is the best way. The way that works is the best way. Every student learns differently so you have to tailor what you do to your students whether that means phonics, whole-word learning, nonfiction, fiction, etc.

I believe that categorizational testing such as the Myers-Briggs Test is inherently flawed. Within the test itself, there are biasing labeling mechanisms (e.g. when equal numbers in the T-F dichotomy result in an F designation).

I believe such labeling ignores the spectrum of diversity of thought and character present in each person. Ultimately, this is stereotyping, which we know results in extremely negative consequences.