At ~ [13:30], Dr. Broditsky mentioned time-based movements and how they differ across specific cultures and languages. 

I found this to be very interesting to learn about. As someone who learned American Sign Language in college, I remember having to learn the different facial movements associated with asking specific questions or making statements. This was a struggle for me when I was learning a bond, and it made me think about how difficult it must be for people trying to communicate and not receiving the appropriate and expected response in their experiences. I think this is important to remember when thinking about the students I teach who are not native to a language or culture. 

At ~ [16:10], Dr. Broditsky discusses reference points in language- sharing how some cultures/ groups use time and one Aboriginal group uses cardinal directions. 

Similar to the previous point I talked about, this was also something that struck me: how people in different cultures across the world interpret and use what we see so differently. It is amazing what the human mind can connect and how it allows us to see and interpret the world. 

At ~ [18:30], Dr. Broditsky talks about how when you teach or learn a new language, it teaches you a new way to think. 

This is something I saw in my limited language-learning attempts at very infantile levels, but I can only imagine how it could change even more if I were to continue learning a new language. It made me more keen to start, or resume, learning a language again. 

At ~ [32:20], Dr. Broditsky discusses how people who know different languages can remember different specific details when witnessing an event.

As a teacher of a forensic science class, this made me think about how I teach my unit on eyewitness statements to students. Students are always so shocked by how bad their memory is, or by why they didn’t see something their classmate did. This point about language differences made me think about how language would impact some people when giving an eyewitness statement. It made me curious whether this has been studied through a criminal justice lens. 

At ~ [50:30], Dr. Broditsky discusses how a direct translation between 2 languages is not possible. 

This statement makes me think about how, when I first encountered sign language, it was a pidgin form of ASL  in grade 7. When I entered a real ASL class at the college level, I had to unlearn some of the attempts at direct translations I had previously learned. While I still had some prior knowledge of ASL, it was not through the right lens, and I had to shift and essentially rewire how I thought about ASL as a language and communication tool in the right ways. 

At ~ [54:15], Dr. Broditsky mentions how the broader your experience in life or with reading, the more open-minded you tend to be. 

I really appreciated this quote and thought about how, when I have spoken to peers or the students I teach who abhor reading, it is so difficult for me to understand. It shifts how I communicate with them and relay information. This also shows how my inquisitive nature and the different perspectives of some individuals I have encountered have been so difficult or different. I think this is an important thing for me to remember and use to help effectively communicate with those around me. 

Hello, my name is Emily. I am a secondary science educator for a small rural district. I teach grades 7-12. This is my 5th year teaching. For my bag, I chose to use my work bag that I take to and from work with me. The items in the bag include: my computer, mouse, work weekly planner, journal, multiple post-it note sizes, and a small bag of pens and pencils. Typically, it has student work I need to grade, too, but I chose to keep that out of the photo.

Every day, I use my computer, an obvious piece of technology, to plan lessons, respond to emails, create resources, grade student work, and access curriculum for my classes I teach. My planner goes hand in hand with this and serves as a central hub for all things work-related, including Post-it notes, which I also have many in my bag. Pens, a primitive type of technology, are used in both my planner and my journal weekly, if not daily. As an individual, I find that I remember things better when I write them down, so items like my planner, post-its, and journal all help me to remember important dates, times, and information. I think this speaks to my ability to blend literacy of both technology and analog practices.

If I were to assess the person who carries this bag of items, I would say they are organized and have a plan. Now, given that you cannot see inside the journal or planner,  one would have no idea if these items are effectively used or even remotely embody the idea of organization. If I were to compare that idea with the real-life version of myself, I think there are times when I match the bag’s assumption, and times when I do not, and vice versa, as over time the bag will accumulate little random bits of trash and old or forgotten lists.

If I were to look at my bag from 15 years ago, I would have been 12 and in grade 6/7. This was fun to think about. I can imagine the old crumpled bit of notebook paper, textbooks, and a tattered binder, covered in doodles, my name in a loopy font, full of class dividers and a planner. fun to think back and compare how I have changed or stayed the same. The leather cover of my planner hides the colorful stickers on its cover and the colorful pens I use to color-code classes. It is fun to see the little pieces of my inner child still peeking through in my professional life.