The recent New York Times article $400 Hourly to Get Them Off the Sofa chronicles the partnership between Wall Steet recruiter Lesley Milter and Greenberg Educational Group to provide career coaching for "unemployed 20-somethings". In it, author Susan Dominus makes a quick reference to Jean Twenge and her book Generation Me
She makes the case that that generation is particularly ill-equipped for a challenging job market: “There’s an element of entitlement — they expect people to figure things out for them.” People like ... tutors?
While I understand that it is unwise to bite the hand that feeds me, this pretty much sums up my feelings on the whole concept of private tutoring.
Note: It has been years since I posted in this blog. When I revisited today and discovered this unpublished draft, I could not resist.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in
The main tutoring company I work for called yesterday afternoon. They want me to teach their SAT course. Even though SAT prep is clearly not my favorite thing, to quote Thank You for Smoking, "It pays the mortgage" (figuratively speaking of course. The thought that I could own property at this point in my non-career is laughable).
Saturday, February 27, 2010
I Post, Therfore I Am
After using the Alvermann quote last week, I started thinking more and more about the types of reading and writing students encounter in their everyday lives, or the 'multiliteracies' as she describes them.
Today's adolescence lives the kind of dual lifestyle we've always heard about since the dawn of the Internet. There's the real 'you', and then there's the 'you' on the Internet. Think back- remember how mild mannered Mr. Anderson, office drown, was the mysterious Neo on the web first before ever becoming aware of the Matrix? I feel like in the 1990s pop culture insinuated that this type of dual identity was all the rage. The idea that you can have a whole life online has become a reality for millions of Americans, adolescence included. Only more often than not, it's not the secret identity/ alias persona we always predicted. "You" online is simply just that. You. Online.
Today's youth, en masse, may be the most prolific generation of writers history has ever seen. They are literally living as the hero of their own story and recording (and sharing) everyday of their lives through writing... all in 140 characters spurts. This is the first generation that can get ideas published and available to a world wide audience within seconds, not years, of writing.
Call me crazy, but I think it might be time we started focusing on HOW these kids are presenting themselves online. What does your writing style say about you? Are you ideas coherent and well supported? Do your grammar and/or spelling choices get in the way of your readers comprehending what you are trying to say? These are all questions that we pose to students when we ask them to write academic papers. Maybe we should start addressing their real world applicability in class instead of pretending that academic writing and Internet communication are totally unrelated. Perhaps instead of reworking the 5 paragraph essay one more time, we could maybe skip it every few semesters and spend a little time on what makes a good post. I'm pretty sure that would finally put an end to the ever present question of "When are we ever gonna use this?"
This would also lay the ground work to start discussing not just what students are putting on the Internet, but how they are being perceived by others and even the larger questions of Internet etiquette, rights and responsibilities, and how to use technology in general. The Internet provides us with two contradictory and yet simultaneous phenomenon; we have the ability to express and react to ideas and concepts anonymously AND allows every detail of our lives to be shared with anyone with the interest and know how to access our information. I sometimes wonder if young people, or any one for that matter, realize just who is checking in on them. For the past few years now, my boss at camp has had to integrate a talk on appropriate Facebook pictures and postings into the staff training he delivers to recent high school graduates and college students, many of whom have never stopped to consider that the kids they work with, parents in the community, and potential employers can all find their way onto their profile pages, despite their privacy settings. A number of my former students have friended me over the past few years. Occasionally I throw a comment on a questionable post or picture that shows up in my news feed. The response (if there is one) is either a confession of mild embarrassment or "LoL! Why are you looking?" The answer of course is that usually I'm not, but these things have a way of surfacing regardless of whether or not I was the intended audience.
I'm not saying that these questions aren't being brought up in classrooms already, but from what I have seen they are typically given a disproportionately small amount of attention when you really think about how much time any of us, students or adults, spend online. In Frontline's 'Digital Nation', Douglas Rushkoff says, "Over the past 20 years... the net has changed from a thing one does to the way one lives." Shouldn't our curriculum reflect this change?
Today's adolescence lives the kind of dual lifestyle we've always heard about since the dawn of the Internet. There's the real 'you', and then there's the 'you' on the Internet. Think back- remember how mild mannered Mr. Anderson, office drown, was the mysterious Neo on the web first before ever becoming aware of the Matrix? I feel like in the 1990s pop culture insinuated that this type of dual identity was all the rage. The idea that you can have a whole life online has become a reality for millions of Americans, adolescence included. Only more often than not, it's not the secret identity/ alias persona we always predicted. "You" online is simply just that. You. Online.
Today's youth, en masse, may be the most prolific generation of writers history has ever seen. They are literally living as the hero of their own story and recording (and sharing) everyday of their lives through writing... all in 140 characters spurts. This is the first generation that can get ideas published and available to a world wide audience within seconds, not years, of writing.
Call me crazy, but I think it might be time we started focusing on HOW these kids are presenting themselves online. What does your writing style say about you? Are you ideas coherent and well supported? Do your grammar and/or spelling choices get in the way of your readers comprehending what you are trying to say? These are all questions that we pose to students when we ask them to write academic papers. Maybe we should start addressing their real world applicability in class instead of pretending that academic writing and Internet communication are totally unrelated. Perhaps instead of reworking the 5 paragraph essay one more time, we could maybe skip it every few semesters and spend a little time on what makes a good post. I'm pretty sure that would finally put an end to the ever present question of "When are we ever gonna use this?"
This would also lay the ground work to start discussing not just what students are putting on the Internet, but how they are being perceived by others and even the larger questions of Internet etiquette, rights and responsibilities, and how to use technology in general. The Internet provides us with two contradictory and yet simultaneous phenomenon; we have the ability to express and react to ideas and concepts anonymously AND allows every detail of our lives to be shared with anyone with the interest and know how to access our information. I sometimes wonder if young people, or any one for that matter, realize just who is checking in on them. For the past few years now, my boss at camp has had to integrate a talk on appropriate Facebook pictures and postings into the staff training he delivers to recent high school graduates and college students, many of whom have never stopped to consider that the kids they work with, parents in the community, and potential employers can all find their way onto their profile pages, despite their privacy settings. A number of my former students have friended me over the past few years. Occasionally I throw a comment on a questionable post or picture that shows up in my news feed. The response (if there is one) is either a confession of mild embarrassment or "LoL! Why are you looking?" The answer of course is that usually I'm not, but these things have a way of surfacing regardless of whether or not I was the intended audience.
I'm not saying that these questions aren't being brought up in classrooms already, but from what I have seen they are typically given a disproportionately small amount of attention when you really think about how much time any of us, students or adults, spend online. In Frontline's 'Digital Nation', Douglas Rushkoff says, "Over the past 20 years... the net has changed from a thing one does to the way one lives." Shouldn't our curriculum reflect this change?
Saturday, February 20, 2010
The Obligatory Rant on Standardized Tests
Yesterday I set my Facebook profile as "Holed up in the cottage preparing for tomorrow's teacher test." This was true for about 3 hours- maybe 4 total. The rest of the time was spent messing around on the Internet for the most part. Even though I have no formal training in elementary education, to be honest I was not overly concerned about the test . There are two reasons for this. The first being that from the practice tests I took a couple weeks back, I knew it was essentially the same as the Secondary level test I'd already taken- just with a few childhood development questions thrown in. SO few in number, in fact, that I knew if I missed them I could still pass.
The second, slightly more embarrassing, reason I wasn't worried was that I'm REALLY good at standardized test. This was not always the case. The first time I took the SATs I got a 1090 (this was when they topped out at 1600). I retook them, but did only slightly better. It's only been over the past couple years that I've learned how to properly take a standardized test.
Ever since I started student teaching, I've been doing some sort of test prep with my students ever year. When I was in Worcester we were prepping kids for the MCAS. When I lived in Westchester test prep services were the bread and butter of the tutoring company for which I worked. At that point I was putting in 4 to 10 hours a week on the ISEE, the SSAT, the SAT or the ACT- whatever was in season at the time (ie, whichever was occurring within 3 months or less. Oh yes, standardized tests have seasons). I've read enough test prep books that I can tell you the strengths and weaknesses of each publisher. Kaplan is the most prolific, with a book for just about every test out there, but their questions are sometimes easier than what is on the actual exam. McGraw Hill questions, on the other hand, tend to be good for over-preparing as they are much harder than what will be on the exam. The College Board, who creates the actual SAT, have accurate questions but limited essay prompts. Barron has a good selection for over-achievers looking for the perfect score...etc. etc. I'm a master of process of elimination. I never fall victim to the infamous, "all of the following are true except" trick questions. Misgriding? Don't make me laugh. I even caught myself getting giddy this morning over a roman numeral question- you know, the kind where they give you four answers and then your options are something alone the lines of "Which are correct? A) I and III only, B) II and IV only C) I, II and IV only..."
So why do I describe this as "embarrassing"? Because these skills have no real world application. Sure I'll use them again if I take the Praxis or GREs, and they will help me, but beyond that, what will I ever use them for? I do often wonder if the fact that there's a multi-million dollar industry built up around test prep- essentially just teaching kids how to READ the test and make educated guesses; one that I myself have made a living off- negates the actual content of the test themselves. I'm certain that if I had known these strategies as a high school student I would have done much better on my own SATs, but would I have actually been smarter as implied by my improved test scores? Nope.
And it's not just the admissions test or the teacher tests. Go ahead and look at a variety of sources criticizing No Child Left Behind and you know the common thread you'll find? Too much emphasis on state standardized testing. People talk about having to cut down on recess, "specials" like art, music and P.E., and even core content classes that don't get tested as frequently such as social studies and science, all to make room for more math and reading test prep. I have never once heard this trend heralded as anything worthwhile. At the least, it has been called a waste of time, and at most the downfall of our national education system. And if that weren't enough, even the type of reading students are being tested on is very limited. Usually the student is presented with a few paragraphs of text- excerpts from articles or stories- and asked a handful of questions about it at the end. In her article "Multiliterate Youth in the Time of Scientific Reading", Donna E. Alvermann writes,
"What likely set of circumstances coalesced to bring about the present situation in which young people are increasingly engaged in digital literacies (largely through the Internet and other information communication technologies, such as instant messaging, chatting, blogging, emailing, text messaging, and online role playing) at precisely the same time in history when those in authority over school-related reading instruction* are moving ever further toward a narrowed definition of what counts as reading?"
So, what does this all mean? That I've sworn off test prep forever starting tonight? That I'll never book another hour of tutoring for it or cover it in a class (assume I ever get one of those elusive "full time teaching" jobs again)? Nope. Not in the least. Ultimately, the truth is that I may moan and groan about the evils of standardized tests with the best of them, but I don't have an effective alternative to offer up in its place. If anyone did, they might not be so prevalent now. Standardized tests are a quick, efficient way to collect data, even if the skills they actually measure are questionable. For all the hubbub, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Until they do, if they do, the best I can do for my students is to integrate some general test prep strategies into my curriculum here and there while still delivering the reading skills and content knowledge they may actual use in real life- even if it's test prep strategies I'm being paid to teach them.
The second, slightly more embarrassing, reason I wasn't worried was that I'm REALLY good at standardized test. This was not always the case. The first time I took the SATs I got a 1090 (this was when they topped out at 1600). I retook them, but did only slightly better. It's only been over the past couple years that I've learned how to properly take a standardized test.
Ever since I started student teaching, I've been doing some sort of test prep with my students ever year. When I was in Worcester we were prepping kids for the MCAS. When I lived in Westchester test prep services were the bread and butter of the tutoring company for which I worked. At that point I was putting in 4 to 10 hours a week on the ISEE, the SSAT, the SAT or the ACT- whatever was in season at the time (ie, whichever was occurring within 3 months or less. Oh yes, standardized tests have seasons). I've read enough test prep books that I can tell you the strengths and weaknesses of each publisher. Kaplan is the most prolific, with a book for just about every test out there, but their questions are sometimes easier than what is on the actual exam. McGraw Hill questions, on the other hand, tend to be good for over-preparing as they are much harder than what will be on the exam. The College Board, who creates the actual SAT, have accurate questions but limited essay prompts. Barron has a good selection for over-achievers looking for the perfect score...etc. etc. I'm a master of process of elimination. I never fall victim to the infamous, "all of the following are true except" trick questions. Misgriding? Don't make me laugh. I even caught myself getting giddy this morning over a roman numeral question- you know, the kind where they give you four answers and then your options are something alone the lines of "Which are correct? A) I and III only, B) II and IV only C) I, II and IV only..."
So why do I describe this as "embarrassing"? Because these skills have no real world application. Sure I'll use them again if I take the Praxis or GREs, and they will help me, but beyond that, what will I ever use them for? I do often wonder if the fact that there's a multi-million dollar industry built up around test prep- essentially just teaching kids how to READ the test and make educated guesses; one that I myself have made a living off- negates the actual content of the test themselves. I'm certain that if I had known these strategies as a high school student I would have done much better on my own SATs, but would I have actually been smarter as implied by my improved test scores? Nope.
And it's not just the admissions test or the teacher tests. Go ahead and look at a variety of sources criticizing No Child Left Behind and you know the common thread you'll find? Too much emphasis on state standardized testing. People talk about having to cut down on recess, "specials" like art, music and P.E., and even core content classes that don't get tested as frequently such as social studies and science, all to make room for more math and reading test prep. I have never once heard this trend heralded as anything worthwhile. At the least, it has been called a waste of time, and at most the downfall of our national education system. And if that weren't enough, even the type of reading students are being tested on is very limited. Usually the student is presented with a few paragraphs of text- excerpts from articles or stories- and asked a handful of questions about it at the end. In her article "Multiliterate Youth in the Time of Scientific Reading", Donna E. Alvermann writes,
"What likely set of circumstances coalesced to bring about the present situation in which young people are increasingly engaged in digital literacies (largely through the Internet and other information communication technologies, such as instant messaging, chatting, blogging, emailing, text messaging, and online role playing) at precisely the same time in history when those in authority over school-related reading instruction* are moving ever further toward a narrowed definition of what counts as reading?"
From Adolescent Literacy: Turning Promise into Practice, Heinmann 2007
(Yup. This is the type of stuff I read for fun now)
*and for my purposes, testing(Yup. This is the type of stuff I read for fun now)
So, what does this all mean? That I've sworn off test prep forever starting tonight? That I'll never book another hour of tutoring for it or cover it in a class (assume I ever get one of those elusive "full time teaching" jobs again)? Nope. Not in the least. Ultimately, the truth is that I may moan and groan about the evils of standardized tests with the best of them, but I don't have an effective alternative to offer up in its place. If anyone did, they might not be so prevalent now. Standardized tests are a quick, efficient way to collect data, even if the skills they actually measure are questionable. For all the hubbub, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Until they do, if they do, the best I can do for my students is to integrate some general test prep strategies into my curriculum here and there while still delivering the reading skills and content knowledge they may actual use in real life- even if it's test prep strategies I'm being paid to teach them.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Bad Blogger! Bad!
I originally started this blog as a way to hold myself accountable for my job search and what we'll call "Do-It-Yourself Professional Development"; the theory being that I couldn't write about nothing, so I would have to put some work in to even generate topics to blog about. I neglected the possibility that I might just ignore the whole project all together, as I've done for the past few weeks. I did spend a few hours one night researching the Race to the Top initiative, but frankly, I still don't fully comprehend it and thus don't fell qualified to chip in my two cents about what it will do for national public education. But that's a post for another time. I mostly wanted to just check in and do a quick post to aknowledge that I've been bad about posting which will hopefully help get me back into the habit of writing posts (repativeness intneded).
I've been spending today preparing for tomorrows NYSTCE ATS-W Elementary (New York State Teaching Certification Exam, Assessment of Teching Skills- Written, Elementary Level). I've taken the Secondary level test already, but I'll need both for my NY Literacy license. I'll let you know how things pan out tomorrow. Promise.
I've been spending today preparing for tomorrows NYSTCE ATS-W Elementary (New York State Teaching Certification Exam, Assessment of Teching Skills- Written, Elementary Level). I've taken the Secondary level test already, but I'll need both for my NY Literacy license. I'll let you know how things pan out tomorrow. Promise.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Things are starting to look up
Over the past 2 weeks, I've gotten 3 new jobs. They are all part time, none of them are in schools and juggling all of them them along with my current retail job might be tricky, but I shouldn't have to worry as much about money anymore, so we'll count this as a win. Two are tutoring jobs, so I can at least keep building my resume. They are all pretty flexible, so if they all work out, I should be able to go home for the summer and come back to them if I don't land a job anywhere else.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Where to?
When I moved to Long Island, I was ready to settle down for a couple years at least. I have moved every spring/ fall since graduating from high school. Literally. For 9 years I have shuffled from dorms, to apartments, back to my folk's.... etc. While living on Long Island itself was never a childhood dream, I was ready to be done with moving vans for a while. Oh Irony! You never are far away, are you?
With no solid job prospects to speak of for next year, I may be moving again in the spring. I've got at least 3 years to fill until Nick finishes his dental program. I'll put in applications here, of course, and hope for the best, but I'm also expanding my search out to New York City, Washington DC, Boston, Worcester, New Hampshire, and abroad. Here are what I consider the pros and cons of each.
Staying on Long Island
Pro: My boyfriend will still live here. Of the 6 years we've been together, 5 of them have been long distance. Neither of us are fans of going back to that phase, but we know we can handle it if we have to.
Con: Super competitive job market* and I don't actually have any of my own friends out here.
*Let's not lie though, this is probably true almost everywhere right now.
New York City
Pro: I already have a NYS license. I'd still be relatively close to Nick. My brother and his wife live in the city along with a handful of my friends. I'd (hopefully) be able to teach in an urban public school again. Oh, and there's like a million things going on all the time.
Con: Finding a place to live/ Cost of living. I'd have to ditch my car, which I've grown to love.
Washington DC
Pro: I'm head over heals in love with this city. When I went last spring with a group of 8th graders, I didn't want to come home. I could spend weekends roaming around the Smithsonian and National monuments (am I a huge dork because this is now my life ambition?). I'd also be teaching in an urban setting AND DC is going through that huge overhaul of their whole district- could be a cool thing to witness first hand if it all pans out- or even if it doesn't.
Con: I worry that "that huge overhaul" may not leave many openings for newcomers like myself. I don't know a soul who lives down there or where I would live. I'd also have to take the Praxis tests to get licensed.
Boston
Pros: I have always love Boston, but for whatever reasons, hadn't gotten around to moving there yet. About a zillion of my friends already live there, meaning I can probably be social and have a place to live. I already have a Mass teaching license. It's not too far from home OR New York.
Cons: My past attempts to get a teaching in Boston have all been unsuccessful. Cost of living, ditching the Yaris, yada yada (seriously, I love that car...)
Worcester
Pros: I know what you're thinking. Pros? Remember when you didn't like living there? Well, yes, I do. But I've started to really miss it recently. I was never really happy about the way I left. I kind of realized right as I was going that I was throwing in the towel before I even really got into the game. It would essentially be an answer to that ever impending, "What if?" as in, "What if an older, wiser, Ms. Manley, who was actually interested in community involvement and all that jazz, was teaching in Worcester. Would things go better?" I like to think they would. Other upshots include already having the state license, connections in the public school district, a good 'feel' for what a typical classroom/ school might look like AND a solid idea of where I can find cheap housing.
Cons: Been there. Done that. Not well mind you, but I did. While moving back to Worcester might answer some personal questions, bring closure, and all that over-romanticized grown up stuff, it just might not be as fun as some of my other options.
New Hampshire
Pros: Crazy cheap cost of living (especially if I can spend some time at the Manley Homestead). Plenty of connections in multiple districts. Family. Family. Family. My sister is having twins in the spring; word on the street is they are looking for as much free babysitting as possible. I could actually make myself useful.
Cons: Pretty much the opposite of the "big city". Don't get me wrong- great place for raising kids. But not the most exciting place in the world. Also, we don't have a lot of taxes, which sounds awesome until you start working for the state government. Also, it's ironically far away from most people I am currently friends with even though we met there. I'd also have to take the Praxis, get a license, etc etc, though I'm pretty sure I could get hired before having to go through all that.
Abroad
Pros: Adventure. At the recommendation of my father, I started to look at American schools in other countries. I haven't even BEEN of the country since I studied abroad in college. When I was in high school I imagined that I'd spend my 20's backpacking around the world, not schlepping through New England and New York. This might be a bit more stationary, but it would still be something I probably would never have the opportunity to do again.
Cons: Whenever I look into teaching abroad, there are some crazy paperwork headaches that seem to come along with, well, every aspect of it. And if Washington DC is 'too far away' from everything I know, then perhaps we shouldn't even be thinking about throwing the distance across an ocean into that equation. Also, not many of the countries I've looked at have ever been on my list of Top Ten Places to Live Before I Die (some I've never heard of) BUT, I think that almost might be a Pro.....
So, there it is. My list. This is what will be on my mind over the next 5 months.
With no solid job prospects to speak of for next year, I may be moving again in the spring. I've got at least 3 years to fill until Nick finishes his dental program. I'll put in applications here, of course, and hope for the best, but I'm also expanding my search out to New York City, Washington DC, Boston, Worcester, New Hampshire, and abroad. Here are what I consider the pros and cons of each.
Staying on Long Island
Pro: My boyfriend will still live here. Of the 6 years we've been together, 5 of them have been long distance. Neither of us are fans of going back to that phase, but we know we can handle it if we have to.
Con: Super competitive job market* and I don't actually have any of my own friends out here.
*Let's not lie though, this is probably true almost everywhere right now.
New York City
Pro: I already have a NYS license. I'd still be relatively close to Nick. My brother and his wife live in the city along with a handful of my friends. I'd (hopefully) be able to teach in an urban public school again. Oh, and there's like a million things going on all the time.
Con: Finding a place to live/ Cost of living. I'd have to ditch my car, which I've grown to love.
Washington DC
Pro: I'm head over heals in love with this city. When I went last spring with a group of 8th graders, I didn't want to come home. I could spend weekends roaming around the Smithsonian and National monuments (am I a huge dork because this is now my life ambition?). I'd also be teaching in an urban setting AND DC is going through that huge overhaul of their whole district- could be a cool thing to witness first hand if it all pans out- or even if it doesn't.
Con: I worry that "that huge overhaul" may not leave many openings for newcomers like myself. I don't know a soul who lives down there or where I would live. I'd also have to take the Praxis tests to get licensed.
Boston
Pros: I have always love Boston, but for whatever reasons, hadn't gotten around to moving there yet. About a zillion of my friends already live there, meaning I can probably be social and have a place to live. I already have a Mass teaching license. It's not too far from home OR New York.
Cons: My past attempts to get a teaching in Boston have all been unsuccessful. Cost of living, ditching the Yaris, yada yada (seriously, I love that car...)
Worcester
Pros: I know what you're thinking. Pros? Remember when you didn't like living there? Well, yes, I do. But I've started to really miss it recently. I was never really happy about the way I left. I kind of realized right as I was going that I was throwing in the towel before I even really got into the game. It would essentially be an answer to that ever impending, "What if?" as in, "What if an older, wiser, Ms. Manley, who was actually interested in community involvement and all that jazz, was teaching in Worcester. Would things go better?" I like to think they would. Other upshots include already having the state license, connections in the public school district, a good 'feel' for what a typical classroom/ school might look like AND a solid idea of where I can find cheap housing.
Cons: Been there. Done that. Not well mind you, but I did. While moving back to Worcester might answer some personal questions, bring closure, and all that over-romanticized grown up stuff, it just might not be as fun as some of my other options.
New Hampshire
Pros: Crazy cheap cost of living (especially if I can spend some time at the Manley Homestead). Plenty of connections in multiple districts. Family. Family. Family. My sister is having twins in the spring; word on the street is they are looking for as much free babysitting as possible. I could actually make myself useful.
Cons: Pretty much the opposite of the "big city". Don't get me wrong- great place for raising kids. But not the most exciting place in the world. Also, we don't have a lot of taxes, which sounds awesome until you start working for the state government. Also, it's ironically far away from most people I am currently friends with even though we met there. I'd also have to take the Praxis, get a license, etc etc, though I'm pretty sure I could get hired before having to go through all that.
Abroad
Pros: Adventure. At the recommendation of my father, I started to look at American schools in other countries. I haven't even BEEN of the country since I studied abroad in college. When I was in high school I imagined that I'd spend my 20's backpacking around the world, not schlepping through New England and New York. This might be a bit more stationary, but it would still be something I probably would never have the opportunity to do again.
Cons: Whenever I look into teaching abroad, there are some crazy paperwork headaches that seem to come along with, well, every aspect of it. And if Washington DC is 'too far away' from everything I know, then perhaps we shouldn't even be thinking about throwing the distance across an ocean into that equation. Also, not many of the countries I've looked at have ever been on my list of Top Ten Places to Live Before I Die (some I've never heard of) BUT, I think that almost might be a Pro.....
So, there it is. My list. This is what will be on my mind over the next 5 months.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)