Here's everything you need to teach The Stories Julian Tells! This novel study includes materials and activities to support and deepen comprehension, improve vocabulary and fluency, and wrap up the reading with fun extension activities--perfect for your second or third grade students! This is one of my all-time favorite books for the classroom. I hope you'll love it as well! For a closer look at the materials included in this resource, please see the PREVIEW above. MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THIS EASY-PREP RESOURCE: ★ Comprehension (Print and Digital/Easel by TPT) •Prediction Chart •Cause and Effect Chart •Comprehension Questions (for each chapter) •Graphic Organizers and Writing Extensions ★ Vocabulary •Vocabulary Words and Figurative Language (by chapter) •Graphic Organizers •Activities to Practice and Extend the Learning ★ Fluency •Fluency Reading Task Cards (for each chapter) ★ Extension/Culminating Activities •Who Said It? •Book Charades •Character Trading Cards •Hot Seat: Question the Characters! •Around the Room With Julian! ★ Also Included •Common Core State Standards alignment chart for Grades 2 and 3 Your students will also love: • THE STORIES JULIAN TELLS Task Cards • MY FATHER'S DRAGON - Complete Literature Unit • MY FATHER'S DRAGON – Comprehension Resources • MY FATHER'S DRAGON – Readers Theater Scripts for Fluency Practice • MY FATHER'S DRAGON – Task Card Fun! Save money by building a custom bundle of my resources! It's like having your own private sale! You'll find more information HERE. Follow my store to receive notifications of new resources and sales. My new resources are 50% off for the first 24 hours, so it pays to be a follower! Don't forget to leave feedback for all your TpT purchases to earn credits you can use for future TpT purchases. I love feedback! Thank you for visiting my store! Please contact me via the Q & A tab if you have any questions. Carla Hoff
all is well in house-o-nefotlak - just thought I'd pop in for an overdue update. teaching prac is going brilliantly - loving the school, m...
The Frog in the Well Alvin Tresselt ~ Roger Duvoisin ~ Lothrop, Lee & Shepard, 1958 Just when I thought there were no more Duvoisin titles...
Every once in a blue moon, somebody who doesn't know me well enough asks why I don't teach an art class sometime. My answer tends to be along the lines of, "Because I'm crabby, disorderly, and busy, so I'd be a lousy teacher." This is true, but the question always gets me wondering what I could possibly teach. And the only answer I generate, lesson 1 I suppose, is: Don't be afraid of foreshortening. People deep in the process of learning figurative drawing and painting tend to be scared of foreshortening. Why? Because it's hard as hell to do a good job, and often, you can't even tell if you've done a good job. Is this a good job? Andrea Mantegna, Dead Christ, tempera on canvas, c. 1490 Well, probably. Who knows? The feet look small and the head looks big. But if you backed way up and shot a real person in this position with a telephoto lens - at 150 mm or more - they'd most likely look like that. So why am I telling you not to be afraid of foreshortening? Because I'm proposing a different way of thinking about it. My proposal is this: there is no such thing as foreshortening. This is very strange. No such thing? But everyone knows what foreshortening is, and it sure as shootin' exists. OK, fine. What is foreshortening? Some outfit called Princeton University offers a definition of the usual level of glibness and uselessness: foreshorten (shorten lines in a drawing so as to create an illusion of depth) But that's not what we mean when we use the word in a sentence, is it? For instance, when we say, "The foreshortened perspective I had of the model made me pee in my pants in abject terror," we're not talking about "shortening the lines" to "create an illusion of depth." So let's go to somebody who has a much better definition of this completely imaginary phenomenon: Foreshortening is a fundamental concept in drawing, designating the distortion of long shapes when seen end-on. This definition is from a post on foreshortening at Fred Hatt's blog. The post is seriously worth checking out - it features Fred's usual elegant and insightful writing, and a lot of his really gorgeous drawings of radically foreshortened poses. Don't worry about jumping there now - I'll post the link again at the end of this little screed. Now, the element that Fred adds, which Princeton overlooks, is that the object is long. Let's build up to a full understanding of the implications of this clause. Consider a sphere: A sphere is uniform in appearance: rotate it as you like, it will be identical with every other view of it. Under the Princeton definition, the central area of the sphere is not foreshortened, and the edges are increasingly foreshortened, up to the boundary, which you could say is infinitely foreshortened - it is right on axis with the viewer, and becomes, geometrically, an infinite succession of infinitely foreshortened points. Or, in common language, a line (a circle, as it happens). Here, this picture makes it clearer: You notice how those lines get denser at the edges? That is because equal amounts of real surface area are compressed, visually, into smaller and smaller apparent areas, until they are totally foreshortened into line rather than plane. Fine. So, let's look at a cube: As this cube rotates in space, various of its surface planes become more or less foreshortened. In the top left image, four planes are severely foreshortened. In the bottom right image, only two planes are severely foreshortened. But nobody ever thinks of a cube as being foreshortened, any more than they think of a sphere as being foreshortened. Why not? Because all of the faces of a cube are identical. It is nearly as uniform as a sphere. If you draw a line from the center of any face, through the cube, to the center of the opposite face, it will be just as long as any line drawn between two other opposed faces. This is not true of the simplest "long" object, the cylinder: You damn skippy there's a foreshortened view of the cylinder: In this view, the long axis of the cylinder is oriented nearly parallel with the viewer's depth axis, so that it becomes shorter than we are used to seeing it. And this is the crux of the concept of foreshortening. As Fred says, the concept applies, as a practical matter, only to long objects, because we are used to seeing the long axis as much longer than the short axis. Apollo 11 Apollo 11, lookin' all weird and squished and stuff We do not think about planes being foreshortened, as Princeton suggests, or we would see the optically "thin" faces of the cube as being confusingly foreshortened. Rather, we have a distinct class of objects which, considered as whole objects, we think of as foreshortened: long objects, particularly those with regard to which we have a common experience of seeing the long axis as longer than the short axis. Like humans. Can you believe I actually found this picture on Wikipedia by Google image-searching "human"? How awesome is that? So, to get to the core of my point - foreshortening does not exist in nature. All objects, at all times, from all perspectives, include planes which are technically foreshortened and technically not foreshortened. The functional conception of foreshortening, as identified by Fred, is a categorical distinction based entirely on an arbitrary classification of objects by: 1. their geometry (long) and 2. our experience of them (long axis parallel with or nearly parallel with viewer's depth axis) Foreshortening is just a fancy and specific way of saying "unusual." There is nothing to be afraid of here. It's not a real distinction. It's just a hopped-up method for freaking yourself out about your chances of getting your drawing right. And let me tell you, your chances of getting your drawing right when an object is foreshortened are already low enough. You don't need to be freaking yourself out. Wait a minute! saith you. You've just been telling me there's no such thing as foreshortening! Now you're saying it's extra-hard to draw? Sure. Because it is unusual. But not because it's in some spooky category. Take a look at these two drawings I did last week, when the ever-delightful Vadim was modeling at Spring Street: Only the foot is "foreshortened." The foot is not foreshortened, but the rest is. Now, that bottom, foreshortened leg, is pretty nicely drawn, if I do say so myself. I was really switched on because I've been searching for an opportunity to do these two drawings for a long time - because I've been planning this post for a long time, and I was psyched to finally get the graphics I wanted. Why was I able to get that leg to look pretty good? Because I've probably drawn legs from that angle a hundred times (I was psyched to write this post, but not psyched enough to go through the heaps of drawings in my closet). I'm not some magical foreshortening ninja, I just have endless experience of most of the angles of view of the human body. This happens when you go to life drawing twice a week for twelve years. But that's not all - and I wouldn't have been able to tell you this next bit if I hadn't lucked into talking over the concept of foreshortening with my friend, the dazzling artist Jonathan Soard. I was running my analytic rigamarole past him, and he came at it from a different angle. He said, "The wonderful thing about foreshortening is that it lets you see things directly, without preconceptions of what they should look like." You know what? This is true. No matter how much you practice - and Jonathan Soard has practiced more than I have - those "foreshortened" views will still be less familiar than the usual long views, because the circumstances of life dictate that the foreshortened views of humans are just not as frequently experienced (unless you're a pigeon). Because they will be comparatively fresh, your eyes will have fewer scales upon them. This leads to endless trouble for people trying to draw foreshortened views - they will try to impose their mental template for the upright view onto the foreshortened view. But once you recognize your templates and cast them out, you will be seeing directly: you will see shapes and curves and forms without preconception, you will see as an infant sees. And this is very exciting. Jeno Barcsay, for instance, spends a disproportionate amount of time in his masterwork on anatomy for the artist depicting foreshortened views of the human body: I am claiming, oddly, that my foreshortened leg works (at least I think it works) for two contradictory reasons: 1. I have a lot of practice at it, and 2. I am seeing it as if for the first time. I don't think we need a big long reconciliation of these two points. It would be tedious. But I will add this: this combination - this combination of the ability to practice until you're good at something, while retaining the ability to see it afresh - makes for some very delightful experiences. For instance, I went through a brief, strange period where I felt like mimicking Manet. Don't ask me why. It happened, and now I'm over it. But I fell into thinking about his dead toreador painting: And I decided I was going to make my own version of the painting, imitating Manet's broad brushwork and flattened planes as much as possible: The Daydream, 48"x30", oil on canvas, 2009 Well, that was really delightful! And it involves a great deal of exciting foreshortening. That was a big part of the fun. Anyhow, my point is not as radical as I first presented it. It is more honestly and minimally stated as this: "foreshortening" describes a real category of perception, but it does not describe an objectively distinct category of perception. Rather, its boundary is based in our experience. So for god's sake, don't be afraid of it. It's just another thing. Therefore, practice will improve your ability to portray it. I will have more to say about Jonathan's work at some point. In the meantime, if you have a few minutes, I recommend you enjoy Fred's writing and work in the post I cited, and throughout his blog.
I share this information from
Years ago when I joined Crazy Quilt International Jo Newsham of New Zealand was one of the moderators. Her seamwork was an inspiration and she had one special twist that was hers alone. If it is possible for something to be both simple and complex, it was her seamwork... Elegant is what the word I think of as well.. She always used perle thread and her seams were filled with variation and contrast. And when most stitchers stop at 3-4 passes on a seam, Jo often had as many as 6 or 7. But the things that was so unique about Jo's seams were the playful variations she often included within a seam. Look closely at the leaves in this seam treatment. They all have a different movement and add a whimsical quality to the seam. Jo did this a lot and I know of no one else who does. Here are a few other examples. Note that there is not only variations in the patterns, there is variation in height and width as well. But here are some of my very favorites of her seams... especially the bottom one where there is a definite order to the variation and the seam grows in complexity as it moves ahead. She used this technique often. The bottom example here has this type of orderly progression and the top seam is a perfect example of multiple layers to the max.... Then about 5-6 years ago Jo got interested in Zentangle and one day announced she was quitting CQ all together to devote all her creative energies to this new passion. I often have this fantasy where I turn in to CQI and she will be back!! But in the meantime I treasure all the seam examples of hers that I have saved...
La comprensión de los conceptos detrás de las fuerzas del arte abstracto y el arte realista te ayudará a entender mejor lo que constituye el realismo abstracto. El arte abstracto es un arte que no tiene un enfoque definible.
Creamy Keto Avocado Chocolate Pudding is so delicious even your guests won't know it's avocado.
You are what you eat. Attractive food for an attractive you. Healthy = Sexy, no matter who you are :) Summer is almost here!!! The intention of this challenge is to help all those participating to …
Some of the Best I Love You Quotes on the Internet. Tell them I Love You with these I Love You Quotes.
Take a break from the details of writing to examine narrative writing from a larger perspective. How can structure increase creativity in writing?
A collection of planet-saving inspiration from the subreddit r/Solarpunk.
Valentine's Day is one of those times of the year when you want to send a perfect card to those special people in your life. Sometimes, you can find a nice card, but are at a loss of what to say. Some people create their own cards, and need the...
all is well in house-o-nefotlak - just thought I'd pop in for an overdue update. teaching prac is going brilliantly - loving the school, my mentor teacher and the kids. actually the whole school is pretty wonderful - very very lucky with this placement. this coming week will be my last - and I'll be teaching almost full days all week. lots of planning to do - but as it's loads of flow on from last week - I'm sure all will go well. I get to finally do some art lessons tomorrow (yay!) - and I'll be teaching 2 classes back to back with the same lesson plan. year 5/6 are looking at energy this term - so I've planned to do a lesson on the 'Op Art' movement - specifically on the work of Bridget Riley - exploring the use of line to show movement. here's a couple of Bridget's amazing works from the 60's..... beware - they can make your eyes hurt!!!..... 'Movement in Squares' - 1961 - Bridget Riley 'Intake' - 1964 - Bridget Riley 'Blaze 1' - 1962 - Bridget Riley in class - we'll look at these and other examples of Bridget's work - discuss using lines to show movement and 3 dimensional shapes on 2D paper - and I'll attempt to work them through making their own Op Art pieces to display in the classroom. when it's done - I'll be sure to take some photos of the completed display to share the fun. in other news - my heart goes out to those Aussie families today that lost their soldier husbands/fathers/sons/brothers yesterday in Afghanistan. absolutely heart breaking. let's get all our troops home safely and soon please AUS government. our boys are doing an amazing job - but this war (which is not ours) has gone on far too long. *sad* have a safe week everyone. cheryl xox.
Since the 16th century, a figure blowing bubbles has served as an allegory for the vice of vanity. A schoolboy slouches on a chair beside his unopened books as bubbles drift overhead. The note tucked in the broken glass reads: "Le Parasseux indigne de vivre" (the lazy one unworthy of living). The soap bubbles and the crumbling wall suggest the fleeting nature of time, and the laurel wreath symbolizes glory ignored. Rejecting prevailing academic traditions, Couture developed a highly personal technique involving bright colors and expressive paint textures, which was based on his studies of Venetian works in the Louvre Museum. He frequently depicted contemporary subjects but filled them with moral overtones. An influential teacher, Couture trained such artists as Edouard Manet, Puvis de Chavannes, Mary Cassatt, and Eastman Johnson.
