Week 3. Learning Activity: Blog 6

The Students:

1. L: Look up words in the dictionary to wrtie definitions. This is a method that adheres to the "learning model" because the assumption is that by looking up the word, the student will consciously learn the meaning of the word. The "acquistion model' would advocate developing vocabulary by encountering word in the context of reading. 
2. A: Make a venn diagram to compare two stories. This is a method supported by the "acquistion model" because this excercise assumes that meaning is created by something more than word recognition. 
3. L: Practice sounding out words. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because it assumes that by being able to decode the word the student will be able to understand the word. The "acquistion model" would want to make sure there was sufficient context and background knowledge to make the new word meaningful.
4. L: Read in a round-robin fashion. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because the oral reading allows the teacher to help students identify words and phrases students do not know. The "acquisition model" advocates silent reading and reading strategies that help students construct meaning from the text.
5. L: Correct peers when they make a mistake during reading. This activity is supported by the "learning model." Even though it is students correcting their peers, the focus is still on decoding and pronounciation--and this a focus of the "learning model." The "acquisition model" is not as concerned with decoding and pronounciation as it is with creating meaning. 
6. L: Identify words on a big book page that start with the same sound. This is also an activity supported by the "learning model." This is a phonics activity. The "acquisition model" would not rely solely on phonics but would create meaning from letters (graphophonics) order of langauge (syntax), and knowledge of the world (semantics).
7. Group cards with classmates' names by a criterion on such as first or last letter. This is an activity supported by the "learning model" because it is focused on letters. It is an inductive approach that begins with letter recognition. This activity might be more alligned with the "acquisition model" if the cards were grouped not by letters but rather by student's characteristics or qualities.
8. A: Write rhyming poetry and then discuss different spellings for the same  word. This activity is supported by the "acquisition model" because it begins with the actual creation of a piece of writing and only then looks at further developing more specific skills like spelling. A more "learning model" activity would be to first learn how to spell all the words and then write the poem.
9. L: Ask the teacher how to spell any word they don't know. This is a strategy supported by the "learning model" because it is more concerned with learing a new piece of information--in this case how to spell a word--than it is with acquiring an understanding of strategies. An activity more alligned with the "acquistion model" would teach students strategies to use when they do not know how to spell a word, such as learning how to use a dictionary to spell unknown words. 
10. A: Read a language experience story they have created with the teacher. For starters, the very term "language experience story" reeks of the "acquisition model." But more importantly, this fits the "acquisition model" because the students have created the story. The fact that the student and teacher examine and critique the story together is alligned with the "acquistion model," in which the primary goal is always the creation of meaning. In a "learning model" classroom the teacher would read the story by himself and simply assign a grade to it. 
11. A: Work in pairs to arrange words from a familiar chant into sentences. This activity is supported by "acquistion model" because it is not so much concerned with decoding and recognizing words as it is with creating meaning. The goal of the activity is to create meaning, and this the primary goal of the "acquisition model."
12. L: Divide words into syllables. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because it is ultimately focused on decoding and pronouncing words instead of constructing meaning. Furthermore, this is not an authentic activity one normally encounters in reading and writing. Its highly manufactured nature also puts it in the "learning model" camp.
13. L: On a worksheet, draw a line from each word to the picture that starts with the same sound. This activity is supported by the "learning model" becuase, first of all, anything using something as artificial as worksheets is in the "learning model" camp. More importantly, it is primarily concerned with phonics and decoding words rather than creating meaning.
14. A: Make alphabet books on different topics. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model." Even though it is using letters, the point is not to simply practice sounding-out the letters but rather to find meaning associated with each letter. Because its primary concern is with meaning, it is an "acquistion" activity.

The Teacher:

1. L: Preteaches vocabulary. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because it artificially teaches vocabulary independent of actual reading. The "acquistion model" would develop student's vocabulary in a fashion intimately linked with reading.
2. A: Does a shared reading of a big book. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because it provides students the opportunity to acquire an understanding of literacy through the teacher's modeling of the reading process. This activity does not explicitly instruct students how to read in an inductive manner. Freeman and Freeman (2004) state that through the shared reading of a big book students acquire the knowledge necessary for them to begin reading independently.
3. L: Makes sure students read only books that fit their level. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model." The "Input Hypothesis" put forth by Krashen states that ideal learning situation is actually when material is slightly beyond a student's independent level. The "Input Hypothesis" states that learning activities and learning materials should be set at "input + 1" or at a level just beyond the student's grasp. Assigning only reading books that are actually at a student's level would reject the "Input Hypothesis" which is championed by the "acquisition model."
4. L: Has students segment word into phonemes. This activity is firmly entrenched in the "learning model" because it is focused on decoding and word recognition instead of creating meaning.
5. A: Writes words the students dictate for a story and has students help with the spelling of difficult words. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because it begins with students creating a story. It's main focus is creating meaning.  Furthermore, unlike the "learning model," there is not an undue amount of emphasis placed on the form. The students are doing the central work of creating meaning. The teacher is just helping by writing the words given to him by the students. Finally, the focus on spelling develops quite naturally as an outgrowth of the production of a text. 
6. A: Asks students to look around the room and find words starting with a certain letter. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model." Although it does contain work with letters, this  acitivity deals with letters in a more authentic manner. While the "learning model" might just teach the sound of each letter in an artifical manner that is devoid of any connection with the world, this "acquisition model" approach seeks to link letters with meaningful things. Rather than "learning" something utterly abstract, students in this activity are "acquiring" an understanding of the world around them and making connections to letters.
7. L: Uses decodable texts. This is a "learning model" activity because the focus is decoding words rather than creating meaning. A teacher in the "acquistion model" would instead give an authentic piece of literature and help the students use graphophonics, syntax, and semantics to construct meaning.
8. A: Sets aside time for sustained silent reading each day. This is an acitivity supported by the "acquisition model" because the focus is on students reading and using reading strategies to construct meaning.
9. L: Teaches Latin and Greek roots. This is an acitivity supported by the "learning model." It is artifical in nature, divorcing vocabulary development from the act of reading. This activity seeks to consciously "teach" students new information. The "acquistion model," on the other, always seeks to let vocabulary development grow naturally out of reading. If a teacher in the "acquistion model" did teach Greek and Latin roots, it would only because the words came up in authentic reading.
10. A: Has students meet in literature circles. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because the focus is again on students using reading strategies to create meaning. In fact, the very nature of the "literature circle" is itself a strategy for constructing meaning because it provides the opportunity for students to create meaning through collaboration.
11. L: Conducts phonics drills. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because its focus is on decoding and only focuses on graphophonics to create meaning; whereas, the "acquistion model" would use graphophonics, syntax, and semantics to create meaning.
12. L: Chooses predictable texts. This activity is supported by the  "learning model." This activity lacks the authenticity to be in the "acquisition model." The "acquistion model" is concerned with authentic reading and unpredictability is part of the world in which we live. 
13. A: Does a picture walk of a new book. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because its focus is on creating background knowledge to make help students gain a deeper understanding of the book. This acitivity is rooted in semantics, whereas the "learning model" is only concerned with graphophonics.
14. L: Uses a variety of worksheets to teach different skills. This activity is supported by the "learning model." The "learning model" uses worksheets to consciously teach new skills; indeed, the "learning model" is not overly concerned that worksheets are not part of the authentic world. The "learning model" assumes that even if skill are taught in a way that seperates from the real world, students can still take that new knowledge and apply it back into the world. The "acquisition model" does not allow for such a transfer of knowledge from the inauthentic and the abstract to the real world. If learning is acquired, it can only be acquired through the real and authentic world.

One closing thought, if the above thought is true, it places restrictions--perhaps even very powerful restrictions--on the acquistion model. It seems to me that we "acquire" learning in real situations and not in hypothetical situations. Does this put a limit on the situations in which we can gain learning. It seems that there is an advantage to being able to gain knowledge in an utterly abstract realm and then taking that knowledge and applying it back into the real world and real world situations. But it seems like the "acquisition model" does not allow this. Isn't that why the "acquistion model" would not study Greek and Latin roots outside the context of the actual reading? I clearly do not have this thorougly thought-through. Any thoughts?

Week 2. Learning Activity 4: Translating

Well, this was painful. In preparation for this learning activity, I went to our school library and checked out a couple of books written in Spanish. I should say, I have taken French, Greek, and Hebrew (I stink at all of them), but I have never taken any Spanish. For my more advanced reading, I checked out the Spanish version of the book Holes, written by Louis Sachar. For my easier read, I checked out the book Magic Gods Of The Volcano, written by Escrito por Malio Argueta.

From the very first page Holes   I knew I was in trouble. There were a few words I knew. I suspected that "En" meant "in." and I was pretty sure "verde" was green. I believe it is the same in French. I was also sure that "grande" meant "big." I also recognized the word Texas. So, in the first paragraph I had some vague idea that there was something big and green in or around Texas. The second paragraph did not go any better. I was fairly sure that "pueblo"  meant town; and I again was pretty sure that "verde" meant green. So, all I could glean from the second paragraph was that there was a green town; however, that did not really sound reasonable, so I was pretty sure I was hopelessly lost.

The only way I knew how to at least try and make sense out of this incomprehensible text was to look on-line for a Spanish to English translator. I found such a device and then translated every word in the first two paragraph. This actually worked fairly well. I know think I have a fairly good understanding of these first two paragraphs. The story opens something like this: "In the Camp Green Lake, there are no lakes. There used to be a very big lake there, even bigger than Texas. (The next sentence still baffles me. It seems to say that there are--or used to be--more than 100 anus." But I'm pretty sure this isn't correct)
But now it is just dry land. The story continues in the second paragraph by saying, "There used to be a town in Green Lake. The town is faded and withered together with the lake and people who used to live there."

Left on my own without any outside resources, I was hopelessly lost. But, once I accessed a Spanish dictionary, I was able to make sense of the text. Even though, as I mentioned above, that I have done poorly at every language I have studied, these previous exposures to language did help. First of all, my grammar is very strong, so I recognized articles, prepositions, nouns, and verbs. I also have some understanding of how flexible syntax can be from one language to the next, so I did not get hung up on words that did not follow the pattern one would expect in English. I also have some experience parsing verbs, so I was able to parse verb forms so they better fit the context of the story. Armed with a Spanish dictionary, I think I could comprehend this book at a fairl high level. But I have a better grasp on grammar and syntax than most ELL students who would be in my room. I do not think I would have been able to get this much out the dictionary had it not been for my previous language course. Of course, this a long time. I only translated the first two paragraphs of the book, which probably took 30 minutes. Looking up every single word is a painstaking endevor. Hopefully, my next go-round with a chidren's book will be a bit easier.

OK, that did not go any better. The Magic Dogs Of The Volcanoes is a children's picture book; it's only 30 pages in length; half of the book is pictures, and the print is very big. But I had no more luck with this book than I did with Holes. In the first paragraph I could understand that they were talking about what happens either in or on the volcanoes in El Salvador. I also knew that lobos meant either wolf or dog and I was able to figure out that "magicos" meant magic. So, I figured out that there was something about magic dogs or wolves either in or on the volcanoes in El Salvador. After looking up every word in this paragaph, I concluded that there are or were magic dogs on these volcanoes. The dogs looked like wolves, but they were not wolves. I also figured out that they eat seeds of the morning (this must be a poetic phrase) these are the beautiful flowers that cover the volcanoes.

I did no better with the second paragraph. I thought "La gente" must mean man, person, or even people. I was also pretty sure that "vive" meant live. Of course, I also recognized the word volcano, which occured twice in this paragraph. So, I figured the second paragraph must mean something remotely akin to: "Somebody lived or  lives in or around a volcano." After looking up every word in a Spanish dictionary, I was able to develop a more satisfactory translation. I think the second paragraph reads something more like: "The person or peole who live in the village on the slopes of the volcanoe love the magic dogs. They say they are the great grandchildren of the volcanoe. They say the magic dogs protect them from danger." Again, the use of a Spanish dictionary, along with a strong grasp on grammar and snytax allowed me to make sense of this text. But it sure took a long time. Not all ELL students in elementary school or even middle school will have the degree of skill I have with grammar and syntax.
It must be frustrating for ELL students to try to create meaning from such seemingly confusing texts.

Week 2. Learning Activity 5: Children's Books

I rumaged through my seven year old son's books and pulled out Diary of a Whimpy Kid: The Ugly Truth by Jeff Kiney and Captain Underpants Dav Pilkey. My son loves both these series and laughs outloud while reading them. As I perused through these books, I found events that an ELL student may not appreciate due to a lack of cultural understanding. For the humor in these scenes to be fully appreciated, someone would need to provide an ELL student with a background schema through which to contextualize these episodes.

 The story opens with the main character, Greg, having no one to play with over summer vacation. This is an issue with which most kids raised in the suburbs can relate. My son Davis has had to battle this. Greg is in a fight with his best friend, and many of the other kids are not around due to summer vacations. An ELL student from another country might not fully appreciate how desperate Greg is for someone to play with. If one does not understand this desperation, one will not understand the next few pages. To bridge this gap in understanding, I could have students share experiences they have had when kids in thier neighborhood have gone off on vacations. I could even have kids draw maps of how far they had to go for a "play-date."

Next, Greg explains how his old best friend, Rowley, does not appear to need him becuase he is hanging out with a highschool kid (Greg and Rowley are in middle school). Greg then tells us the Rowley's new best friend works for a company who mentors younger kids. An ELL student, and many of the students, for that matter, might not appreciate that Rowley's new friend is a real friend but someone his parents have hired to hang out with their awkward son. To fill in this gap, I could search YouTube for commercials of "Big Brothers."

In another scene, Greg is at first upset that Rowley was going to a "rock concert." But when he found out that "rock concert" was really a sappy teen singer loved only by elementary school girls, Greg was no quite as upset. This scene has an illustration. The signer's name is "Joshie" and a bunch of girls are at the stage practically fainting. An ELL student unfamiliar with American pop culture might fail to realize this performer appeals only to girls and, frankly, a boy would be a bit embarressed being seen at this show. To help fill in the cultural gap, I could show brief clips of Justin Beiber and possible even "High School Musical."

Finally, there is a scene in which the teachers at school are all "freaking out" because the standardized tests are starting. The teacher threatened the kids that if they did not do well on the tests, the budget would be cut and they would have to replace classes like P.E. and art with detention. Again, an ELL student, espeically if he has not been in the United States for very long, might not appreciate this situation. To better understand the stress the teachers are feeling and threats made, students will have to have some idea of what standardized tests are and important they are. To build this background knowledge, students could share thier memories of previous CSAP tests. They might mention how much the teachers talked about their importance, how banners were made encouraging students to do their best; I could even bring in the newspaper article which documents how every school in the state performed to help students see their importance.

In Captain Underpants the two main characters--both little boys in about the fifth grade--decide to create a comic book. As simple as this seems, it occured to me that an ELL student from another country might never have seen a comic book or even a superhero movie. If a reader does not have this understanding, an understanding we simply might take for granted, the rest of the book might always be a little confusing. To build this background knowledge, I could bring in a bunch of comic books. Kids could select a comic book to read and then report back to the class what there comic book was about. This activity would allow an ELL student to understand what a comic is; he would understand what a comic book looks like, about how many pages are in it, and even the different genres.

The two protagonists tell us, the reader, that because all superheros run around in what looks to be their underware, they were going to create a superhero who actually did run around in his underware--Captain Underpants! Again, an ELL student has never seen a comic book nor a superhero movie, such as "Superman" or "Spiderman" will not get this joke. The previous activity in which students read a comic book and then report back to the class will provide an ELL student with the necessary background information to understand this part of the book.

In another scene, our two protagonists pull a big prank at the high school football game. To understand this scene, one would need to have a mental image of a big high school football game, complete with bleachers filled with parents, cheer leaders and even marching bands. To fill this cultural gap, I could show You Tube clips of high school football games, particularly in places like Texas and Oklahoma where these tend to be a real big deal. An ELL student, who may have never seen a big high school football game, could now get a mental image of the severity of the boys' prank.

Finally, the school principal learns that it was the boys who ruined the football game, so he puts them on permanant punishment at school. The boys' lives are miserable, and they do not know what to do. Then they order a hypnotizing ring through the mail and hypnotize their principal. They make the principal do all kinds of crazy things, like walking around like a chicken. An ELL student with little exposure to American culture might not know what it is to be hypnotized. I could again turn to You Tube and look for clips of people who claim to be hypnotizing someone. Whether the clip is even remotely legitimate does not matter, students will still come to understand the concept and, therefore, understand how the boys got out of trouble.

This learning activity was very enlightening. It certainly helped me to better anticipate cultural barriers an ELL student may encounter when reading a book; and it gave me at least some beginning ideas of how to create the schema necessary for such a student to be better able to create meaning. But as I was finding these issues in these two books, it occured to me how many other native speakers, raised their whole life in the United States, might still not possess the background information necessary to understand a particular book. It occured to me how much I have taken for granted.

Week 1. Learning Activity 3: Relationship Between Oral Language and Reading Process

I believe there is a significant difference between the development of oral language and the development of the skill to read. I agree with Freeman (p. 23) when he states that most children acquire their first langauge without much formal instruction. My son is seven years old, and I can still remember those years where his language ability just exploded, with very little formal instruction. But I disagree with the linguist's consensus that reading is also acquired. As I stated in my other post on writing, I am  not sure why there has to be these rigid schools of thought concerning reading. The "word recognition" school has its strengths and the "sociopsycholinguistic" view has its strengths. Indeed, I can't believe there are people in the one camp who reject the positions of the other camp.

Freeman states that in the "acquistion" model (I'm not going to spell out "sociopsycholinguistic" more than I have to) teachers read to students from big books, which then gives the students all the information they need to start reading on their own. This view is not supported by the National Reading Panel, which strongly supports the teaching of phonics. The National Reading Panel repeatedly states the effectiveness of phonics instruction: "Systematic and explicit phonics instruction significantly improves children's reading comprehension." "Systematic and explicit phonics instruction is effective for children from various social and economic levels." Systematic and explicit phonics instruction is particularly beneficial for children who are having difficulty learning to read and who are at risk for developing future reading problems." I think only academics could possible deny the common sense that phonics is a very important buiding block to successful reading. While there is a large portion of oral language that is simply acquired, I do not think reading works the same way. I believe there is a reading code that children must learn to decipher--and the best tool for this is phonics.

Again, I find it hard to belive that people actually belong to one camp or the other. And, of course, there is no logical reason why these two camps must be so rigidly seperated. Freeman (p. 26) states that those from the "acquisition" school of thought believe that reading is about constructing meaning. Does this mean that people in the "word recognition" school do not think constructing meaning is important? Again, the National Reading Panel states that "Systematic and explicit phonics instruction is most effective when introduced early." Once children have the phonics skill to decode words, of course they need to develop all those reading strategies that Freeman seems to say are the exclusive domain of the "acquisitionists." Cannot one believe that phonics instruction is essential and also that students must be able to context to help determine meaning, use background knowledge to construct meaning, and make inferences? How are these exclusive?

Week 1. Learning Activity 2: Writing Instruction (part 2)

So, I realized in my first post that I neglected to discuss whether my writing instruction was more "traditional" or "process" oriented. The writing instruction I discussed in my post was more "traditional" because it almost exclusively focused on the parts (grammar) of writing. This was exactly what I needed, however, because at the age of twenty-five I knew exactly what I wanted to say. My message was very clear to me. But my lack of grammatical proficiency got in the way of the message. Having said that, I must comment on my perception of this section of the Freeman text.

I found this section of the Freeman text to heavily biased. First of all, the very categories themselves seem to slant the discussion. The term "traditional" conjures up images of strict a schoolmarm hitting student's knuckles with a ruler. While the term "process" seems to illicit images of kind teachers kneeling next to their students, both engaged in intellectual advancement-- and done so in a very "nurturing" environment.

I accept the premise that a "traditional" approach is inductive and begins with the parts, while the "process" approach is more deductive and begins with the message. After that basic starting point, however, I feel as though the distinctions start to break down. In fact, I believe the "traditional" approach becomes a bit of a characture. First of all, the paragraph for "Goals and Methods" (Freeman, 30) is twice as long for the "process" method as it is for the "traditional" method. We are told that in the "traditional" approach that writing is done in a "fairly short time." They did not go through revising and editing? I find that hard to believe. Human beings have been editing and re-writing for thousands of years. We are also told that in the "process" approach, students "produce different kinds of writing." Is the implication that the "traditional" approach only writes in one style (probably a very boring style). Furthermore, those in the "process" school "set aside time on a regular basis for writing." Again, is the implication that those in the "traditional" model do not set aside time on a regular basis for writing? And my personal favorite (I appologize, as I can no longer contain my sarcasm), those teachers in the "process" model "realize that students must read frequently." Again, is the implication that teachers in the "traditional" model do not recognize that students need to read frequently? I found the teaching strategies discussed in the Freeman text to be very helpful. But I found the categories to be a bit silly.

Week 1. Learning Activity 2: Writing Instruction

My most profound writing instruction came a bit later in life. When I was seventeen, I dropped out of high school. At the age of twenty-five, I began attending a junior college--the only place that would accept a high school drop-out. My first semester I took a basic composition 100 course. Our first assignment was to write an essay about something we knew how to do well. I chose washing clothes. I was several years older than most of my classmates and living on my own. I thought this would be a humorous paper. I put so much care, love, and effort into this paper. It was descriptive. I had a light and humorous tone appropriate to the topic. I thought it was brilliant. I was shocked when my paper was returned to me with a big fat D- on it...But then I saw the comment on the back page. It said something to the effect of "This was hysterical--but you don't have a clue as to how grammar works. Come and see me after class."

I will never forget Mrs. Psomas--and I will always be deeply indepted to her. She persuaded me to work with her a few times a week on grammar. I did not miss one session that entire school year. By the end of the year I had learned all the grammar that I did not bother learning in middle school and high school. Then she reccommended a book: On Writing by Zinzer (I believe). The focus of this book was on getting rid of extraneous words to let your most powerful words have center stage. A year later I was in a full-fledged four year university, taking all liberal arts classes, where all I did was write papers, and enjoying great success.

My path to writing well might not be typical. I always had strong verbal skills. Even as a high school drop-out, I was rather well spoken. Describing something, starting with a broad point and supporting my claim with specific pieces examples came fairly naturally. The one big problem I had was the grammar, which seemed to get in the way and impede what I was trying to say, what I could hear in my head. Once I learned the rules of grammar, my writing quickly accelerated.

How can this help students? Well, I certainly would never advocate waiting until one is in thier mid-twenties to learn how to write. But I will certainly stress how important it is to learn some principles of grammar. In order to write well, in order to creatively and persuasively express your opinions, one must know a few simple rules: What constitutes a sentence? What constitutes a sentence fragment? What constitutes a run-on sentence? How does one use dependent clauses and phrases? This certainly seems boring and not nearly as fun as writing a fictional story, but it is essential not only to academic success but to simply being able to express yourself well.

Week 1. Learning Activity 1: Philosophy of Literacy

I asked, Irene, the head of the reading department at my school, about her philosophy of literacy. She began with a very broad statement. The first thing that came to her mind was that literacy must be made available to all and that everyone, without exception, can achieve. From this point, she then moved on to how we as teachers help make sure all our students achieve. She talked about a "path" we, as educators, must construct for our students. First, we must meet our students where they are at. Then, we must empower them to become responsible for thier own learning.

The two tools that Irene thinks are crucial to helping our students become independent learners are scaffolding and differentiation. The importance of scaffolding is also mentioned by Pauline Gibbons (2002), when she states that the only real learning occurs when the teacher guides a student to do something he would not be able to accomplish on his own. This statement does seem to hold-up to the scrutiny of simply logic. Irene's statement regarding the importance of differentition harmonizes well with her belief in meeting each student where is he is. Irene also thought relationships were an important ingredient in teaching.

Irene also thought it was important to expose students to whole array of literature, covering a multitude of genres. She thinks it is important to make sure much of the literature we, as teachers, give our students is relevant to their interests and backgrounds. They should be able to connect in some way to the literature they read. Although, when some literature may not seem to have an obvious and immediate connection to their lives we, as educators, must help them see the connections. She also thought that we must take advantage of mediums such as video and music to enhance student's connection to the material under examination.

I thought Irene's most profound point was is regards to the purpose of teaching literacy. Irene stated that literature is a way to allow students to be exposed to--to understand and appreciate--their past, their present, and even their future. Literacy enables students to better understand the world in which they live and their place in this world. Indeed, it even empowers students to dream of creating a new place in the world for themselves and, perhaps, even a new place for others. Literacy empowers students to gain knowledge, understanding, and even wisdom. Now, what will they do with that power?