Sam's point that you can exceed in economics by simply thinking was very interesting to me. When I hear the word economics, I think of businessmen in suits, sitting on a computer, dealing with the stock market. I think of mainly numbers. However, even the world of stocks is like a chess game. There is strategy behind every move. To do well in economics, you have to think well. The decisions that "changers" make are based on patterns that they have seen before, or things that they know to be true -- like supply and demand.
Sam's description of the pistachios made me think of issues like global warming or ice ages. According to Sam's view on humanity, we will never run out of energy on this earth or run our earth into the ground. Before it happens, we will alter our "destructive" ways.
This book is making me want to join an economics class. haha.
I would have to agree with you on that last comment you made. I'm having the slight thought of learning more about the economy as well. Also, you had a very interesting analysis on what the meaning behind Sam's pistachio activity was.
Reading Sam's section of the book made me laugh. He seemed like he'd be perfect for High Tech! I could just picture him in a class room doing the money activity, but starting with a prompt to get everyone's brain flowing. As I read the first prompt that Sam gave, I stopped and thought about the question for a few seconds. To be honest, my reaction would have been something along the lines of the boys talking in the back of the class saying he was crazy, but it was interesting to see how the conversation evolves to talk about a room full of pistachios. I never in a million would have come to the answer that they achieved in the room, it was strange to think about economics with more than just numbers. It actually gave those random numbers that I think about some context which was nice to see.
Laura on the other hand seemed very interesting to me only because she seemed so proper and the type of person to follow every rule in the book and over think things way too much. I really wish that the conversation between Laura and Sam would have happened. I feel like if that conversation were to happen/had happened, Laura would have pushed Sam out of his comfort zone, but Sam would somehow manage to have some sort of witty remark with an intelligent response to her question about Wordsworth.
The idealogical banter between Sam and Laura in chapter 3 is a wonderful argument about seatbelt laws. I believe that Sam makes excellent points about human life and how our government controls it. If you want to turn off and airbag in a car, you have to write your local government to approve you. This brings up an important question in America, there is a fine balance between freedom and protection. In America we often pride ourselves in being the freest nation on the planet, but that isn't the case. We do not have the freedom to not protect ourselves, perfectly exemplified by seatbelt laws.
Laura also makes good points. Buckling your seatbelt is so easy and saves lives, so why not make them mandatory? Sam and Laura's ideas clash, and I could not pick out a right or wrong answer.
I wonder about the second chapter and the two characters portrayed in it. They seem so utterly different from each other but at the same time there is an unbelievable amount of things they have in common. Both work in the financial world, both are greeted by secretaries. Only the world of Charles seems colder than that of Erica, both living a life that seems a little off. I really did wonder what the purpose of their contrast was, why the author thought it necessary to show these vastly different yet oddly similar people to the reader.
So far, I am finding The Invisible Heart fascinating. The clashing of Sam's and Laura's ideas and beliefs makes for an interesting debate. I happen to side more with Sam, but he does continue to bring up new points and ideas I hadn't thought about, such as giving V-8 juice to homeless people. His line about helping people on their own terms also made me think. If someone is sad and needs someone to talk to, someone will talk to them. But if someone wants you to help them harm themselves in some way, is that really helping them in the first place? If not, then where is the line drawn?
One curious thing about the book was how it switched from the story of Sam and Laura to Erica and Charles. I'm curious as to what their story will be.
Carly, I am also curious to see what type of relationships we will be reading about. I wasn't expecting the switch to Erica and Charles. I wonder what's going to happen!!
I'm quite curious as to what will become of Erica and Charles's story as well. Perhaps the two stories will come together and some of our questions will be answered.
I thought the very first chapter was extremely interesting and set a tone for the rest of the book. When Sam, who is so far my favorite character, assigned their pop quiz, I was automatically trying to solve it in my head. I'm super logical and I love math, so at the end when he said that the right answer was that we would never run out of oil I was extremely curious to why this was, because according to the problem he gave his students it seemed like we must run out of oil. But then he explained his thoughts and they made sense. It showed that you had to think deeper than just the surface of this question, and throughout the first few chapters Sam has displayed this again and again. In chapter 3 when he was talking with Laura about the V-8 juice, to get to Sam's conclusion you had to think way past just giving a homeless man some juice or money. I think that this thinking past the surface theme is going to continue throughout the book.
The way that Roberts crafted Sam and Luara's lessons to switch throughout the beginning complements both of the ideas they're trying to illustrate. As Luara gets the class to talk about the corruption of materialism, Sam's class exhibits it with the 'money on table'. This creates a much more fulfilling narrative that discusses the topic while showing it. Sam's example of pistachios and oil are interesting, as he says that we will either learn to be more efficient to delay our demise or search for an alternate way. If we circle back to Luara's argument with Wordsworth, we can say that if money is on the line, people will go straight towards destruction before giving up any large amounts of anything.
Based on Laura and Sam's initial lesson subjects, it will be interesting to see if Erica and Charles might represent anything.
The first 3 sections where very different compared to certain things I have read they two main characters are so different from one another. I really like when authors have characters who are on different ends of the spectrum. For example Sam is more layer back but really cares about others on the other hand, Laura listens to what her parent say and tries to follow. I wonder throughout the book will she be more of her own individual?
I'm finding this book to be fairly interesting with a good point intent in it as well. I like sam because he seems to be wise with what he does to get his class to understand his logic, but able to add a bit of humor in as well. He has a good personality that can make himself stand out as a character. He does his job well as an economics teacher and seems like a pretty cool teacher, one that I would want to have. I also find the debate between Laura and Sam interesting as it offers an idea that even though you can be great and wise, there will also be people who will controdict you. I'm also interested in the debate that seems to be coming up with Charels and Eric
I am very interested in the way Sam thinks. He thinks that you can you work in economics by thinking in the easiest ways but I have always seen economics as complicated areas that need a lot of work. It is a serious career so I was shocked by his answer. Then, after thinking about it, I understood why he meant it. I really love it when stories jump from character to character. It gives us a complete perspective on what everyone's emotions are. So far, this book has got me thinking about how we see problems and how to deal with them. I love it when stories get me thinking!
At the beginning of the book, I was intrigued by Sam's first-day's lesson at school. The way he opened his class with a pop quiz, asking for the amount of time it would take for the earth to run out of oil. It struck me when he stated that we will not run out of oil, for we have an infinite amount of time before it happens. Before oil completely runs out, we will continue to find cheaper, more efficient ways to supply us with sources of new energy. I am curious to find how the rest of his classes play out, for he definitely has a very explicit vibe that flows not only throughout the class, but outside of school too.
During the first chapter of the book it had a very good lead in that hooked my attention. It was how he described whats going to happen to the oil. The way he compared it to a room full of pistachio nuts were you can take some to eat but you have to leave the shells in the room. What I expect from him in during the next 3 chapters though is for him to bring this style of creativity into the class room. Where he can make a creative new idea for a complex subject seem so simple.
My first impression of Sam was the same as the students, I thought that he was insane for giving a pop quiz on the first day. But then his idea of "thinking being the goal of economics", made me think of him as a wiser man. He almost reminds me of HTH's teaching techniques. We always try to think outside of the box, and answer questions that involve deep thought. Sam's ideal way of teaching/ thinking, is going to make this book very interesting to read.
I understood Sam in the first couple chapters of the book, however, in the third where he is arguing with Laura, he started to irritate me. I'm not saying that I think we should force our ideals on others, I understand and even sort of agree with his idea. I am saying though, that the way he seems to think, while deeper than most, is very black and white. The world isn't that way, different circumstances are everywhere but he didn't seem to be recognizing them. I wonder if he'll continue this trend, or start showing that he does see shades.
My first impressions on this book are that it is a very intriguing one and the way that the author conveys the idea of economics through the use of a romance is integrated flawlessly and achieves its goal of making economics more friendly to the common person, whilst still keeping its core ideals and portraying the information necessary, even if it is not readily apparent the first time you read it
I found it very interesting that Laura assumed her ideals clashed with Sam's ideals. Just because Sam is an economist, doesn't mean he is necessarily skeptical of money's corruptive power. In fact, dealing with money might have made him even more likely to agree with Laura. Sam, as a economist, simply acknowledges that money runs the world. In order to successful and enact positive change, money is almost always involved. Community interest can be essentially just as powerful as motivator as self interest, in a selfless enough individual. In his words, economics is "Life Skills 101." Perhaps, Laura should teach "Human Skills 101" to remind students there is more to life than money.
Nice analysis, I agree completely agree with that Laura could teach Sam that there is more to life, and maybe even Sam could teach her about the power money has.
I felt like Sam was a really cool guy. His first lesson made economics so much more enjoyable. I also think think Laura and Sam are a perfect fit for one another. I like how the book shows both of them at the same thine, it's almost like they complete one another.
This book is quite interesting so far. Sam is a really interesting character based on his views and ideas on things that relates to economics. His first "lesson" to his economic class was something that struck me the most in the first three chapters. Its the idea that made the lesson interesting and an easy way to think about economics. Sam seems like a guy with a humorous personality and a thinker; he would be a cool teacher in real life. Since this is a novel about economics and romance, I wonder how the story is going to flow later on the book.
The parallels between the two classes is pretty neat if you ask me. They are two different classes but they both as having rather similar conversations to start about corruption of money/materialism and the effect it has on people. It seems to be written very poetically. How she compares the splash of color from the movie poster for "It's a Wonderful Life" (I love that movie as well) with the dreary dead economists and relates it to feeling like the out of place poster is "someone flirting at a funeral."
The second tale is very different from the first. In the first one, you can see where the romance factor of the "economic romance" comes into place, you could see traits in the two individuals that could mix well. In the second one, it seems very detached. It makes me wonder if all chapters of the story will be individuals.
I adore this book so far, especially the conversations between Sam and Laura. The debates/discussions are heated and do an incredible job of making the reader think. For me it was incredibly difficult to choose whose side I was on for each conversation they had and when I did, the choices were inconsistent. My point being that both Laura and Sam brought up incredible, thought provoking points on all conversations they seem to have. This trait in both characters makes them people I want to see more of and have a real conversation with. One point that I definetly sided with Sam on was the discussion of car safety. I'm pro-choice for most things, (politics that I shan't get into at the moment) seat belts and helmets not being an exception. If the right to free will is taken away then the government is essentially forcing one quality of life which may work for some people but does not fulfill the needs of others. Everything can be considered dangerous, thus the safest way to live is with no car at all. It is interesting to wonder where the line can be drawn at when the government should step in to protect the safety of individuals and not let them choose the life they live.
Towards the end of the reading, I thought it was interesting that the author presented a contrasting narrative. As I thought about it, the contrast had occurred earlier, when the story was jumping between Sam and Laura's classes. Since the book is related to economics, I wonder if contrast will become a major theme of the book, the contrast between rich and poor, blue collar and white collar, etc.
I think these first few chapters were a great intoduction into who the characters are and their apperence. The argument between Sam and Laura at first seemed a bit silly, but throughout the argument, I thought about society now a days. We get so caught up in arguments with others that we begin to forget what we were fighting about in the first place. Their argument about seatbelts raised great questions, but it could have lead to a meaningless argument. This important because it helps me reflect on what I put my energy into, and if somethings are worth my time or not.
So far this book has a lot of close connections within out High Tech High community. The teaching style of Sam has many commonalities with that of a High Tech High teacher in the way that it engages the students. It makes the student think on a deeper level and explore other possibilities. Now on the opposite side of the spectrum we have Laura who has a more traditional style of teaching and is relying on past methods of teaching to help to her class. When I was reading this I took a moment to weight the differences between the different teaching approaches and which would be more affective. Furthermore, can one method of teaching work better for a specific concept then the other.
Honestly have to say, I'm really enjoying the story so far. Not so much for the conventional sense of enjoying stories, that is, the plot, the charecters, all of that. While I'm sure all of that will turn out to be wonderful for this book, what I appreciate more is the fact that all the conventional aspects of the story are acting as a vessel of the larger, philosophical concepts and meanings to shine through. There is something to be said for a reading that can speak to the reader on a level they connect with, keep them intrigued and interested, and more than that will really make them think about just what it is they're reading. I'm happy with what I've seen so far, and am eager to see what the future will bring!
I enjoyed being welcomed to this book by "Nut Room". Here Sam attempts to lower the level of complexity that is Economics, but interestingly enough it is who Sam picks to deliver this wisdom. Amy to an onlooker or Sam, would look like a mindless student who cared less for an education. Her insights though were the most in depth we have seen so far in the book. While other children immediately whipped out their calculators to calculate the proposed problem, Amy actually took the time to take about it. Isn't this the HTH mentality? Rather than taking the "inside of the box" route, we are encouraged to explore, think, feel and reflect; exactly what Sam encourages Amy to do here.
The book and this story line is very interesting. The comparison of the two teaching styles of Sam and Laura are totally different. Laura leaves her students hanging with questions and makes them answer there own questions that they have. On the other hand Sam uses some other tactics such as games and scenarios to get his point across. Yes the teach different subjects but it is interesting that they do not follow a lecture style type of teaching. Maybe as the book progresses they will each teach there ways of teaching to each other.
Sam makes economics class seem interesting and trendy. Which in turn makes the book worth reading. I greatly enjoyed his activities and even more so enjoyed the authors use of students to show different perspectives/views on these. Because the author did this with Sam and Laura's students personality/action descriptions it allows the reader to place themselves in one of there shoes so that they may feel connected or be able to relate to the book. For example I personally feel that I would be the students in the back questions his sanity (which the author does a tremendous job of not making them seem improper). Overall this book makes me wonder and think, I am excited to follow the roller coaster of this novel that is any good book.
" Thinking is the goal of this course " " Be skeptical, think for yourself. And remember a few core principals of human behavior. Learn how to use them and you will excel in this class " . I agree with most posts when they state that Sam would fit in well with an educational system like High Tech High. One of the students say something along the line of " Is he crazy ? " because he is different. It states that he is part of a very small flock which I interpreted as there are very few like him. Laura has that style of teaching that makes them go farther and comprehend whatever it is that they are curious about. She makes them think deeper to the point where they can answer their own questions. I feel that if Sam and Lauren can merge their teaching styles, it can be a very effective way to get students to get engaged
The book so far has actually been surprisingly interesting, and I feel like there are a multitude of interpretations of the text. The sheer conflict between Sam and Laura was quite interesting, especially comparing the reckless and eccentric demeanor of Sam with the uptight, Umbridge-like style of Laura. The portrayal of these two characters in a school setting just exacerbates the contrast between their two different demeanors, and it makes the reader feel like they are caught between a violent debate, not only between the obnoxiously self-confident economist, and supercilious English teacher, but between the characters and their own point-of-views.
I didn't notice it until you pointed it out, but Laura does have an Umbridge-esque personality, which made it all the more interesting and engaging when the two were arguing.
I am always weary of good craftsmanship I can see from an author in the first chapters of a book, it is all a set-up for a "bigger picture".
When I read through the contrasting story line of the Invisible Heart, I realized at the end there should be some type of great impact or large resounding message I am supposed to take from the book--when I know that I want to step away from a book and criticize. My hope is that while reading the Invisible Heart I let go of this inclination and enjoy it for what it is.
I think it is really interesting to read about the style of learning being implemented in the classroom in this book. The approach of explaining one simple thing that can relate to something very confusing reminds me of our school. Also, the discussions taking place are very similar to the way we run discussions in our classroom. What came to mind when reading this is how another student from another school may analyze this style of learning. They may think what is going on in this book is very weird and different, or they may find it a helpful way to learn. However, the fact that we are at High Tech High means that we learn in this way daily, and gives us an entirely different perspective on the book.
I think that the different perspectives in this story are very interesting. I really like how Sam brings forth a very different view on economics and material worth, but also on human nature. In the beginning, I thought that Sam and Laura would have very different perspectives on money and wealth because of the quote she brought up. But as the story progressed, it felt more like they were arguing about the same side of one topic. I thought Sam’s idea about life being about living it to the fullest and experiencing everything the world has to offer was very interesting, because he is an economist so I assumed he would have a more materialistic outlook on life.
So far I’m really enjoying this book, I think it’s because it’s a different style from other books I’ve read. Through these first chapters Sam and Lauren were disputing with one another over seat belts, and to me that argument was interesting . All the points they brought up made me think and look into their reasoning on why they believed they were correct. I also found it interesting how their ways of teaching are similar to the ways that teachers from High Tech teach. Such as deep critical thinking, like the question Sam gave his students.
The opening of this book feels like Model UN, if they actually discussed meaningful, interesting topics. A little bit of daoist philosophy can be inserted as well due to the incredibly contrasting characters; on the left, we've got the eccentric, down-to-earth economist with a more estranged view of the world, while the right of the ring holds what could be best described as a pretentious, coddling, book-smarts student who knows in their mind what is best for others. Viewing the two personalities and ideologies clash leads to a very entertaining read.
Economics has always been confusing. I'm not 100% sure about anything when it comes to someone saying 'economical or economics'. I see it as a scary word that has tons of complexity behind it, including math. So for me, seeing the way Sam teaches in his classroom- the way he targets the thinking part of the teenagers brains is intriguing. He would be quite suitable for HTH life. He has a craziness I think students need to be entertained by to focus and be ready for the next day. If I were a student in his class I know I would be thinking: "What is this guy going to do today? Say today?" And i think that is what keeps the kids paying attention, along with the dollar activity.
Something that I found humorous and logical about his lesson was the activity where he called on a girl and discussed pistachios in a room. I thought that was pure genius. He made such a big topic like oil consumption into a simple, easy to understand explanation. Using pistachios in a room with thousands of shells left behind. I can't imagine how he thought of that clever way of helping kids understand.
I think that the way tis books written is very interesting. It sometimes may be a little hard to keep track of when it jumps from perspective to perspective. In the beginning the characters were a CEO and a girl that works in a government building. But now its about teachers at a high school. However It become less confusing when a few of the points of views joined together and it read as just one story. I am wondering if the story will return to the characters at the begging of the book. Also if at some point all of the stories will somehow join together. I also think that the way Sam approaches things is rather intriguing, it seems as if he finds a way to dispute anything anyone says.
I highly disagree with sam on the point of seatbelts, helmets, and airbags. sam says that there are other ways to avoid getting into accidents, like driving slower or less often, but even that cant help you as much as an airbag. what if some maniac crashed into you while going slow? what if you were on the freeway, where it is illegal to go slower than 60 miles an hour? While airbags cost money, I think that everyone should have them, along with helmets and seatbelts (regardless of how "uncomfortable" they are.
So far the book seems very interesting, sam has a strange view on a lot of things, and i think if a teacher opened a class with a pop quiz i would probably just walk away, but i cant. I really want to hear more of his ideas, and see where the debates between him and laura. I am not so sure about my feelings on the alternating chapter/story thing though, I dont really like the second story as it doesn't capture my interest as easily as the first one does.
In the first chapters, I really liked Sam and Laura and the conversations they had with each other because of all the thinking and different opinions, as well as Sam's lesson on money and he seems like a good teacher, but I'm not sure why he was fired. Was it because of the lesson of money he taught? I'm thinking it's because people don't like his unique way of teaching things because he "should" be teaching the "real" things, like math, etc. instead of meaningful stuff like that.
As for the other characters, I like Erica because she knows what she's doing and is involved in her job, but I'm really disliking Krauss and his decisions/opinions for his company. Hopefully Erica has a plan to do something about him and hopefully save the company's workers and the town.
So far this book made me think about how our school teaches. Sam and Laura both seem to be using indirect teaching styles in their classes. Neither of them ever really tell the students the answer instead they wait until one of the students figures it out or becomes close to the answer. I think this way students will learn more since they are having to think critically. Much like our classes at High Tech High which focus on thinking and solving the answers instead of just simply memorizing. Sam seems to be a really fun somewhat crazy teacher who I think will really get through to the students and provide them with a fulfilling learning experience.
So far, "The Invisible Heart" is becoming rather intriguing. I like how the author incorporated various teaching methods, including the kind that our teachers use in the HTH community. Each of the characters are well written as well. The author didn't just choose to portray Sam or Laura per say as the "typical teacher", instead they both of character, depth, and even a point to where they both get into a heated argument.
Some of the things they were discussing really got me generating all sorts of personal opinions. For example, I believe that seat belts and other safety things such as helmets should be required by LAW to use. While this IS a free country, there are still rules that must be executed and safety is one of them. I look forward to reading the next part of this story.
I felt the same as you. I could really connect back to our school and teachers, as we look towards them as collegues and see their depth and personality. Also I was very interested by their safety conversation.
So far, "The Invisible Heart" reminds me of the book "Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell (which I read for honors). Both books look at the underlying aspects of things that might seem straightforward at first. Of course, the specific topic matter may not be the same between the books, but what matters is the use of utilitarian-logical-politically correct-less perspective. I don't mean to put a bad spin on it either, I think that reflecting in this way, about the patterns of society and such, is an efficient and important method for quality assurance.
I feel a connection to the opinions of the character, Sam. He constantly questions everything, at every step in the logical process. This is so important and so often over looked. It seems that many people form an alternate perspective for a reason that seems especially not apparent but more intelligible, and just settle with that, failing to take it a single step past saying "well I bet you didn't think about the fact that...".
When questioning the patterns and elements of a society that are so foundation or imprinted, there is a larger margin for being misunderstood. Just like in Outliers, sometimes it can really help to forget the social stipulations some though processes have, like thinking about the differences in culture or wealth.
The last thing is that no one should ever disagree just for the sake of disagreement. I'm not sure where I stand on the ethics of compulsory seat belt wearing, but I strongly agree with the idea of choice and the points made by Sam. People should be able to choose. But that doesn't mean I am immediately against the law. Yes choice is positive for many reasons, but so is safety. Just like Sam, I will always wear I seat belt because I believe it will keep me safe and is worth the discomfort. In cases like these, like all the ones brought up between Sam and Laura, there must be a line drawn between safety and choice. Currently in society, there is a line drawn, in a place that could be argued drawn too far to either side. Is the line in the right place? Does it work? What is "working"?
I'm not totally certain, but studying the "economics" of "things" just creates more questions, and since there is no end to the questions in sight or sense people will be answering them for the rest of our existence. Is "life", or the quality of it, improving with every question "answered"?
"His perspective on the world turned a wait for a subway train into an intellectual tennis match." How I felt reading this and these first few pages with the conversation between Sam and Laura was relevance. I was so connected to the way Sam sees the world. Using the HOHAM perspective, he looked at everything from different angles, keeping in mind all the different arguments you could make for just one simple topic. They both mentioned how they didn't understand the world with all the different people and why people do what they do. Reading this quote, I thought I couldn't have said it better to explain my thought processes. This to me is very interesting, how he was talking about the doctor at the dinner party. How people can think a certain way but can always find a reason to put more importance over it.
Getting to know the characters, I believe these two seem to be the both extremes of people. Laura likes to function by the social rules established and thinks within the box. Sam on the opposite end sees the world from an "economists perspective" with human nature and the reasons that drive people. When Laura heard about Sam, she was both shocked and intrigued by him. As she talked with Sam, she realized that this man was on a totally different platform of thinking as her. Sam comes out as an oddball with his numerous ideas of giving alcohol to the poor and legalizing the ability to not use your seat-belt. This book is a love story and I am curious to see how they will ever create a connection with their opposite ways of thinking.
I'm going to agree with a huge majority of people, and say that Sam is my favorite character. I think what makes me like Sam more. I think I like him, because he always has a economist view on what's going on. I really like all the different types of activities that are throughout the book. Also the metaphors that are used frequently, make everything a little easier for me to understand on what goes on.
So far, I adore this book. The way the author guides the reader through scenes is absolutely flawless, as writing itself, something to be admired. Conversations between Sam and Laura are thought-provoking and entertaining, and they reveal a lot about their personalities and character motivation. Sam has a broad perspective and sees connections in life, whereas Laura is specifically focused on individuals and less on systems and interconnection. I am excited to see what the rest of the book has in store - I love Sam's personality and Laura is quite endearing.
So far I've enjoyed this book. I really captures my attention more than any other books I've read so far. I find Sam really interesting and how he can capture an audience attention. I find both teachers, Sam and Laura, with interesting teaching skills. Laura goes by the rules of a teacher, and Sam well he goes creative and make learning fun and interesting. I thought what he did about the pistachios and comparing it to the oil and wondering if will ever run was an interesting way to teach students instead of just saying that "one day the oil will run out cause..etc." No he was very different with it. This reminds me of the teachers at HTH and how many teachers have different styles of teaching. Like for Mrs.Clark for instance, she introduces new content by either making her students learn certain dances or skits that can make it fun for us but also educational.
I really wonder the connection between the chapters involving Sam and Ms. Silver and the chapters with the buisness executives in the buisness world. At the immediate moment they seem like two seperate stories but I wonder if maybe they will later in the story literally connect or if maybe the buisness world story acts as a metaphor to outline one of Sam's many points. I often find myself sympathizing with many of the points that Sam puts forth towards Ms. Silver. They are not always the most intuitive points but they are ones that altogether make sense. So far I actualy really enjoy this book and can't wait to continue reading it .
This book so far has really captured my attention. I enjoy the debates between Sam and Laura and how they seem to argue anything. One thing that Sam said that struck me the most was when he said you can help others, but if its on their terms. What does that really mean?
This book has really caught my attention so far. It is an interesting type of writing that has got me wondering how the rest of the book is going to be. I love reading about the lessons the teachers teach. Hearing about the different teaching methods and reading how they explain something is super interesting to me. At first when reading this book some parts about economics and literature were hard to understand but the writer has a good way of explaining it in a sort of way anyone could get. It is interesting to see that economics can at one point be so complicated yet explained in such a simple way. I can't wait to read more of the book.
The activity that Sam did in his class really fascinated me. Economics can be very dry to some students sometimes and by engaging them with an interactive activity the students' attention was caught. I also thought it was strange how on the first day of school he began teaching economics. It seems like every first day of school I've had we didn't do any learning whatsoever. I bet the students in Sam's class will gain a far deeper understanding of economics throughout the year.
I have been enjoying this book so far it's different from other books I've read in the past. The discussion between Sam and Laura about wearing seat belt was really interest and made me wonder about if the government should make people wear their seat belts. In my opinion seat belts should be optional the government should make you have to wear a seat belt. It's at your own risk and you should know the danger your getting your self into. But overall this book is really enjoyable and interesting, this book is different but good as I read I caption everything that is going on.
So far, I am honestly interested in Sam's first day lesson at the school. The fact that he started the whole thing with a pop quiz has already got me interested, and also asking for the amount of time it would take for the earth to run out of oil. When he said that we will not run out of oil, I kinda disagreed, but after hearing his point, I leaned towards his side that we will find an alternate solution. I am really interested in finding out more lessons that he teaches because there is a sense of wonder with each one to come.
Within the first few chapters, I was already hooked on this book. I love the debates between Laura and Sam (although theyre mostly Sam) and I love hearing Sams point of view. There are so few people who have or argue that perspective and i loved hearing the points he made. They were some that i hadn't considered before and hearing them definitely made me think about my own opinions on the matters.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.