When [Josep Maria] Pou
read draft number one, he said «This film is going to be blessed,» and Claire Bloom said, «We are going to the Oscars.»
Not exact matches
But a first
read of the new
draft (and, notably, it's still being called a «
draft») and a
number of skeptical lawmaker statements suggests this is one legislative rabbit that political wizard Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could have trouble pulling out of his hat.
This could take a
number of forms: a suggested «wait (and reflect)» time before responding to texts that cause an immediate, negative emotional reaction; a check - in with a friend or adult about a troubling text and a
draft response (some youth in our studies suggested that this was routine for them); or a request to «take it offline» and talk in person in order to get a proper
read on tone and gravity of a situation or conflict between friends.
Currently, the
draft plan seeks to slash the
number of students who aren't 100 proficient in
reading and math by half over the next six years.
Critics on the left have taken issue with a
number of things surrounding the standards (you can
read a post about eight problems with the Core here), saying that there was not enough input from educators into the
drafting of the Core, that the standards are not based on any research, that they ignore what is known about early childhood development and much more.
Or you can send out your manuscript between
drafts to a
number of people you connect with as beta readers, who are willing to
read your book and offer feedback at whatever level you might find useful — from catching typos, to telling you the character with the Southern accent just ain't cuttin» it.
Those who are
drafting discussion papers should be careful to structure the document so that it can be
read and accessed by audiences with a range of literacy levels and limit the
number of questions requiring a response.