Q1:
I learned about different items that I didn't believe could be part of writing in the work. As I started out, I was just thinking of writing as mainly grammer and getting to the point. In it I see it was more then what was seen
Q2
As I started reading through my works, I started to understand what writing was really more about. Like how funds of knowledge, being the intelegence from the community we live in. That is something I would never have understood about as I looked at it.
Q3:
For the questions that I ask they were almost similar through out the works. I see the possibilities of how it works, but can this work the same way to others? Will this always work with these kinds of people it talks about? Will it even work at all? These are really the main questions I ask.
Q4:
To the questions, looking back through the readings that so called ease dropped on. Communicating with my work, to find that it not works all the time. This gave me leverage on my work, cause it not really repeating what the readings say but what the opposite effect or opposite side that could happen.
Q5:
With all those questions, I really wanted to understand all the good and bad sides of all styles and points of views about the subjects. I learned that reading the sources not only gave me a frontal view of how they see it, but can aways gives me a ley way for the questions I seek
Q6:
Their a things that are unresolved to me, like questions in Moll and Gonzales, that I couldn't answer, or works that never seemed quite right like the poster that never really completed.
