It's important to note here that Raskolnikov did not plan to kill Lizaveta. He had a carefully calculated plan to kill the pawnbroker, but her sister was in the wrong place at the wrong time and it cost her her life.

The plan has come to fruition.

Here is where psychology starts to play a major role - think about how our minds operate, think about what kind of influence dreams and thoughts can have over our behavior and actions

The previous tavern story was a flashback - this indicates to us that we are now back in the present.

Here is where the novel starts to get it's namesake - think about this question, do the ends justify the means? Would killing a bad person to make the world a better place be an acceptable crime?

Why is this in italics? Breadcrumbs...

Characterization of Lizaveta.

Is he talking about the horse dream or the plan? Or both?

Remember that plan I told you to keep track of? - Dostoevsky is being very clever here. He wants you to think that this statement is about the horse in Raskolnikov's dream, but it's actually more breadcrumbs to what is going to transpire later on in the story. Start connecting the dots and see where they lead you.

Remember - that entire story was just a dream. The girl in the torn clothes was real, the horse was a dream.

Why is "it" capitalized? What significance does that have in this context?

What do you think he means by this?

Characterization of Razumihin - think about what he must be like if even Raskolnikov is drawn to him and finds him pleasant.

Here, Dostoevsky switches gears on us and doesn't make it clear. Some readers might think the next events are a dream, but they are actually reality. Raskolnikov decides to go on a walk when the following happens. Pay particular attention to how he reacts to the situation.

It's all part of the plan...

We know Raskolnikov has been planning and plotting this whole time...what do you think he is going to do to prevent Dounia's marriage?

He just made the entire situation about himself - what do you think about that? Is it really about him, or is he being selfish?

Think about this act carefully - does her sacrifice remind you of something else? Could Dounia be considered a 'Christ-like' character for this sentiment?

Considering these two scenarios, do you agree with Raskolnikov that would be better for Dounia to stay with Svidrigailov or to marry Luzhin?

What is the 'tone' of the whole thing? What do you think Raskolnikov means by this?

This is important - there is an old addage that "love is blind" - do you think that Dounia and her mother are blinded by love or are they turning a blind eye to a larger issue?

Basically what Raskolnikov is thinking here is "Dude, this is your future wife and future mother in law; you're supposed to be rich; why aren't you paying for them to travel more comfortably?" - What do you think? Would you allow your future wife/mother in law to fend for themselves?

'seems' and 'bride' are in italics - why? For what purpose?

Think about how quickly Raskolnikov's mood has changed - when he first finished reading the letter he was crying and sobbing, but now he is so enraged he could murder a man. Does this say something about Raskolnikov's relationship with his family? Does this say something about his psychological stability? What do you think?

Interesting thought...

Even Raskolnikov's mother is using language in her favor - think about how Dostoevsky uses his craft to sway the audience and how he could write that into a character as well.

Why do you think he has made this declaration? Does he have any grounds or merit for his dissatisfaction?

Quite a change in Raskolnikov - this is the effect his mother and sister has on him.

They are trying to position Raskolnikov to be Pytor's secretary - think about the implications that would have on his marriage with Dounia as well as how Rask would feel being the secretary to his sister's husband.

This is a huge statement - think about what that says about Dounia's character, but it also foreshadows what their relationship is likely to be.

Think about this statement very carefully - there is no great love on either side - the two don't love each other but are going to get married anyway. Again, not super uncommon in this era, but think about all the challenges that will present for their relationship.

Red flag? This will get worse, I promise.

Why would she need to say this? Does Raskolnikov have a habit of judging people too harshly or does his mother have an impression that Raskolnikov won't like Pytor and therefore wants to head off the disapproval?

Think very carefully about this character description - does this sound like a man you'd want to marry? Does this seem like the perfect match for Dounia? Hint, she is not 45, she is MUCH younger than he is. That is not uncommon in this era, but does contribute to the dynamic of the relationship.

Conflict of interest? Some underlying motives? Innocent repentance? Think about the connection between these characters - it may be useful later.

This is Dounia's fiancee.

This is important. Remember this.

Think about what this says about Svidrigailov's character - why repent at this point when you make it out unscathed? What does this say about his feelings for Dounia if he is willing to prove her innocence to his wife?

Offered her the promotion of being his mistress.

In simple language...He liked Dounia, but did the whole little boy thing where you tease and are mean to the girl you like. (Reminder: this is a married man - she is the house servant)

Like a maid or house servant.

Does this sound like the same Raskolnikov to you?

What are these sufferings to which Raskolnikov's mother is referring? Keep a look out for more explanation as we meet these characters later on.

Raskolnikov's sister.

Nickname.

Why put 'alone' in italics? What do you think Dostoevsky is trying to articulate or emphasize by doing so?

Notice the change in Raskolnikov's character and personality - the other characters are now noticing he has changed. What does this say about his current psychological state? Do you think Raskolnikov could be suffering from a psychological disorder?

This all contributes to his character and his actions throughout the novel.

Remember this.

Fair warning, Marmeladov is about to tell a veryyyyyy long story. Stay with him, it will end (I promise). It is not super important that you know every detail about the story, but he does introduce his family and give some insight about them - that will definitely be important later on!

This is going to be a reoccurring symbol throughout the text. Last year one of my students arguing for one of the characters as a "Christ" figure - think about who you would characterize this way. If you don't know right now, that's okay, just think about it as you go throughout the text.

Do you pity Marmeladov? Why or why not?

How does this reaction contradict what we already know about Katerina? Why would she respond this way?

How do you suppose she got the money? What does that kind of sacrifice tell you about Sonia's character and her priorities?

Marmeladov's daughter.

What do you suppose he means by this?

Note the use of the pronoun - who is us? Why use this pronoun at this point?

Two things happening here:

1. Raskolnikov is acknowledging his plan.
2. His plan is causing him psychological distress. These two things are going to be very important as we continue throughout the text.

More breadcrumbs. We know that Raskolnikov does not like social interaction with people, so why is he making small talk with this pawn broker?

This is the pawn broker's sister.

Italics - referring back to the plan (that we still don't know about yet). Dostoevsky is leaving us a lot of breadcrumbs and we will find out soon what it is he is plotting.

Notice this paragraph was in a single quotation - this is how Dostoevsky indicates both spoken dialogue and what Raskolnikov is thinking. This will happen FREQUENTLY throughout the text. Raskolnikov suffers from psychological trauma, so he spends a lot of time talking to himself - Dostoevsky wanted to illustrate that so he gives us those inner conversations Raskolnikov has with himself. Be sure you keep track of when we are in his head vs. not - that will help with confusion.

This paragraph is an example of when we have both outward dialogue and an internal conversation - it is important that you read carefully to discern which is which. Dostoevsky will always give you clues to help you, just make sure you are watching for them.

Character description of the pawn broker.

Character description of Raskolnikov - it is important to KNOW this because as you read, this will not be the character you visualize in your head. Think about how Dostoevsky is able to write a character one way, and make you imagine them differently - what are the implications of that?

"the excitement grew more and more violent" - foreshadowing.

Think about the way Dostoevsky is using this word (yes, I know we cannot analyze diction) - but think about the connotation around 'rehearsal of his project' - everything Raskolnikov is doing is calculated, you need to remember that as we get deeper into the text.

Still talking about the plan.

What is the plan? We don't know...yet, but stay tuned as he will reveal more.

Remember this from your "Prince" vocabulary list? Think about what it means in this context.

Think about why this is in italics - to what is he referring? It is not quite clear yet, but that is part of Dostoevsky's point. Considering all that we know about the main character already, what do you think he could be thinking?

Very important.

This is going to be a significant part of Raskolnikov's personality.

Fun fact: though the names of places are abbreviated or left out altogether, you can actually retrace the protagonist's steps in modern Russia - many scholars have done it. Though this is a work of fiction, each of the locations mentioned is real.

This will be a MAJOR theme in the novel.

This is a very important piece of information to remember about Dostoevsky - especially in relation to this text.

Look for this same theme written into the character of Raskolnikov.

Understanding the cultural and contextual considerations of the work is going to be very important in your written assignment!

Then why do we do it? New tech doesn't mean that the old stuff is invalid or useless. When will we learn...

Key step - often left out. I feel like PD is a time for admin to throw a bunch of tools or programs or philosophies at you, but they never check in on how implementation is going - there isn't that feedback element or reflection on how it works in the classroom. It feels mostly like an imposition that "should" work.

This feels like a 'duh' to me. Think about anything you do, one-shot never works, why do we expect it to work for teacher training?

How is this defined?

My district is grappling with this. 20% of my evaluation is student achievement, but what exactly does that mean? Test scores? Portfolios? Surveys? Interesting that they outline this as a way to "effectively identify and support quality teaching" I often feel this supports teaching to the test. Something to think about.

Most of my PD sessions are run by a) people who have been removed from the classroom for years or b) people outside of my district. It would be interesting to be in a PD with teachers that have taught my particular kids successfully.

What is meant by trust? Trust with/in what?

I feel like this goes not just for admin, but for us too. We don't want our evaluators pointing out all of our shortcomings, why do we do this to our students? I feel like this has a trickle down effect, if your admin focuses on teacher ability, teachers may focus more on student ability - both of which are likely to increase student achievement.

This is huge - if we want to improve our learning environments and achievement for students, we need to spend more time perfecting our craft. We need better PD to make this happen (not more, just better).

We also discussed this in our Wicked Problem - why not make common assessments that incorporate several disciplines? For instance, a park project - design the park (math), fill it with vegetation (science), write a proposal asking for money or zoning permits (english), design a playground for kids (PE), etc. - That would be one assessment that can test skills in all domains.

This is EXACTLY what our wicked problem was about. These are the skills kids need, but we are not providing a framework in which these skills can be taught, learned, assessed and implemented.

Connection: this is something we have discussed at length throughout this course, especially as we see technology permeate various areas of our lives (i.e. Pokemon GO).

Maybe talk about this a little bit? This happens with Google and Facebook as we click on ads and they learn our habits.

YES! Huge idea here.

This is the same thing that has been reiterated by Sara & Rick as well as Piotr & Kristen. Make make reference of this in our presentation.

I really like this idea - Stephanie & Angela discussed whether digital media is helpful or harmful in the hands of our students and I think this would be a good connection to that.

I had never thought about attention as a literacy before. This is an interesting concept - I'd like to discuss further.

I think this touches on our discussion from Wednesday morning - we often throw technology around with no training and then wonder why it isn't being used or used effectively.

A valid use of technology. But what happens when that goes too far and we rely on technology for everything? I just picture Disney & Pixar's Wall-E film here. Technology does so much for us that we can no longer function on our own.

Thought about our presentation - we could ask students to post something through their various social media mediums as we begin and see how many views it can get by the time we are finished with our presentation to illustrate the implications of our digital presence. Illustrate the dangers of not being cautious with your content online.

I think this can be such a valuable tool for our students, unfortunately, this is a fundamental issue. I have heard that the average person has an attention span of 8 seconds. With all this media and information out there, how can we expect students to stick to one platform for an extended period of time? Too often I want to use tech, but find students on social media or doing other things. Is it possible to train this discipline?

This is how I currently view much of society - we are so worried about learning how the hardware works that we aren't learning about the cyber aspect of it.

This is something I find myself saying to my students all the time. They don't know the dangers of their ignorance or inexperience in posting content online. I know it is easy to think that we are protecting ourselves our keeping our information private, but with so much data in cyberspace, how safe is our content really? Digital citizenship is going to be essential for the coming generations.

I see this as one of the biggest issues in schools preparing students for real life situations. Schools are not equipped to create realistic learning environments because of lack of funds, budget restrictions and other factors. While technology does close this gap for some, there are many schools who do not have this access to technology, or have too little access. Even old fashioned print materials can be scarce for some schools. Unfortunately, some of this won't change until accountability factors (standardized tests) change because teachers often refuse to teach students in a medium different than what they will be tested in (that has both positive and negative consequences). I think if we want to make learning more genuine for students and encourage that transfer outside the classroom, we need to make our classrooms more like the real world scenarios students will face and give them the proper equipment to accomplish their tasks.

I understand the need for cross-curricular learning, but I don't think there has been enough buy in. Too often the subjects that team up are math & science, or history & English, which use many of the same skills but fit together logically. I think to encourage far transfer, disciplines that are not logical connections should be paired with one another - the possibilities are endless. Science and physical education, English and foreign languages, science and history, etc.

Homework that is purposeful can have a huge benefit, but the trick is to make it purposeful. The days of sending home practice worksheets is over, we need to find ways to encourage learning outside of the classroom because 250 hours of instruction > 65 hours of instruction. I feel like that is doing a disservice to the kids by asking them to transfer skills they never had the time to master.

I hadn't thought about there being different types of transfer before. I think it is important to understand the distinctions if we are trying to help our students. I can see a lot of vertical and near transfer in my classes, but I think the administration and community wants to see far transfer - that is students apply academic skills to non-academic settings. I think talking more about the different levels of transfer and using those to scaffold could help more people reach the far transfer stage.

I think it is interesting that the author uses the word hope in this sentence. I think hope is exactly what many teachers do - they lay out all the skills and knowledge students need, but don't help them through the transfer stage, they just hope the student figures it out for themselves. I think transfer needs to be more explicitly taught, until students can think through that process on their own.

I think this is very common, unfortunately.

I see this happen a lot on my campus, especially in math. Students will go through sets of practice problems and will feel like they have a grasp on the content, but the test will then ask them to transfer their skills. They will be given word problems that don't specify or encourage a particular process for solving, so students get very frustrated that "the review was nothing like the test." I think we need to find a better way to bridge this gap, or make it apparent to students why the test seems different from the review, but actually requires the same skills and knowledge.

How do we change this?

What does this look like in practice? How would I make this happen in my classroom?

I know as teachers we have all had that moment when we teach a concept that is so basic and logical to us and our students just don't get it. We get so frustrated because we cannot understand how the students are not understanding something so simple, but this touches on that phenomena. We as "experts" in our content can see patters and information that our novice students cannot.

I feel like this is a common strategy we try to encourage our kids to use, not for learning, but rather for time management. We often encourage students to "chunk" their readings so they can do a little at a time and not get overwhelmed with the amount of information they have to remember - I think we need to stress the idea that this helps with discerning patterns which facilitate thinking and memory formation, and it's not just a time management strategy.

This is relevant to the idea that our students all come to us with varying levels of prior knowledge and different understandings of content and concepts that can affect their perceptions and learning.

I recently read an article about ways to engage students within the school community and one of their suggestions was to invite parents to professional development sessions. Though I am not yet sure how I feel about that proposal, it is an interesting concept. The article mentioned that this helps parents understand the expectations for their child and ways to support learning at home. It also gives parents insight into the demands placed on the teachers by the school and administration. I would like to get some other's opinions on this and discuss what types of professional development would be beneficial for parents to see and what that might look like in practice.

I see this a lot in my GT classes - some of my GT students are in the latter group; they are willing to struggle to accomplish something personal. My high achievers, on the other hand, are in the former group; they constantly ask me "what do I need to do to get an 'A' on this assignment/project/test?" I would like to foster more students in the latter group as struggling to success is a fundamental value in life.

I think this is important for teachers to remember. I feel like when these new teaching strategies come out (PBL, Flipped Classroom, Stations, Maker Space, etc) teachers think that you are no longer allowed to lecture because kids do not respond to that. Too often teachers try to implement these new strategies holistically, for every lesson and that is just not reasonable. Sometimes you have to lecture - it may be the most effective way to deliver the content. Sometimes PBL doesn't work for what you want students to gain from the lesson. I think it is important to encourage teachers to use a variety of strategies and not just one - it is also important to note that the newest strategies are not always the best. Lecture style classrooms produced a lot of intelligent people before PBL was created, but I think newer teachers are afraid of it.

How do we make this a standard practice in our schools? How can you train teachers to train students how to recognize their thinking?

This is a struggle I have as a teacher in Texas. Students are required to pass 5 state standardized tests in order to graduate (this was cut down from the original requirement of 15). If students pass all their classes, earn all their credits, but don't pass the test, they don't get their diploma. It is difficult for me to not think about the test constantly because I don't want students to fail and miss out on their diploma. I would like to move more toward practical applications of skills and life/workplace skills, but until those are tested, I have to find a way to marry these two approaches. I'm interested in learning how to more effectively help students acquire deep conceptual understanding, while also passing their required tests.

How do we encourage this? Many times students think they are "done" with something, but I can quickly glance at it and see huge holes in their work. How do we teach someone to continue gathering information until they have exhausted all their options?

I've had many discussions with colleagues about the use of positive reinforcement. One colleague shared with me that positive reinforcement only works where there is the potential for a negative consequence. In this case, the positive reinforcement (food) is paired with a potentially negative consequence (being stuck in the box) that encourages the cat to escape. I am concerned that using just positive reinforcement will foster an environment of entitlement in which people expect a reward for doing the right thing.

Literacy development is my district's new "problem of practice." I think that over time literacy has changed to include a whole realm of technology literacy and it is essential now, more than ever, that students understand the different types of literacy and how to code switch between them.

As a high school teacher, I think this is one of the greatest obstacles I face with my students. Too often students think the skills we are teaching them are reserved for classroom use only. I think getting students to understand how to transfer their skills would help people value education more and see their skills as necessary for lifelong success.

I am very excited to see the relationship develop between these two disciplines. When pursuing a psychology minor, I was often discouraged by my counselor because it was "not a marketable degree." As an educator, I think it is essential that we understand cognitive development when designing and delivering content.