Online Professional Development Sessions
Tonight at 9:00 PM EST: Our Final Webinar!
Finding Joy in Math
Presented by Howie Hua
It is common for a math educator to hear “I’m not a math person” or “Oh, I hate math.” How can we show that math as a subject is something to go towards rather than avoid? In this talk, we will discuss ways of finding joy in doing math inside and outside of the classroom.
Click here to register for this webinar!
NCTM Principles and Standards From an International Perspective: How Does the Curriculum Bring Educators Together on a Common Discourse?
Written by Yeliz Günal Aggül
Curriculum has a very central role in teachers’ lives. Mostly, curriculum is identified with, characterized, and concretized through resources, called “curricular guidelines” in the literature (Pepin & Gueudet, 2014). Their titles might change from country to country. To give examples from two countries where I conduct my research, I can mention NCTM Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (2000) or Common Core State Standards for School Mathematics in the USA and the Teaching Program in Turkey. Regardless of the country in which it is designed and implemented, these resources provide a framework and a national agenda for which learning outcomes will be taught and when. Beyond this central role, curriculum has another, mostly taken for granted, function that has to do with teachers’ solving their problems of practice and improving their teaching. A successfully designed curriculum provides a common discourse that functions as an anchor and orientation that supports teachers in shaping their teaching, finding a path to pursue their professional development, collaborating with their colleagues, and partnering with educational researchers in this process. Ball and Cohen (1999) clearly explain the importance of a common discourse among educators in advancing education:
- In the education of professionals, discourse serves additional purposes, which are related to building and sustaining a community of practitioners who collectively seek human and social improvement. The discourse of teacher education should also help to build collegiality within the profession and create a set of relations rooted in shared intentions and challenges. Such discourse should focus on deliberation about and development of standards for practice and on the improvement of teaching and learning (Ball & Cohen, 1999, p. 11).
Considering the fact that the curriculum is the main tool that represents and reflects this common discourse, I will discuss the following questions: Who determines this discourse and how in different countries? Does the curriculum fulfill this function successfully in any country?
I will provide some answers to these questions as a doctoral candidate in learning sciences who closely works with mathematics teachers in her research and as a former teacher who taught middle and high school mathematics for seven years in Turkey. Throughout my doctoral studies, I explored if there were alternative ways of supporting teachers to improve their practices other than top-down professional development programs in which the knowledge is transmitted from researchers to teachers in a unidirectional way. With this motivation, since April 2022, I have supported a group of mathematics teachers in creating their professional community under a non-profit organization in Turkey called Teachers Network by implementing a methodological paradigm in learning sciences known as participatory design research.
The first phase of the community-building process was dedicated to problem identification. To discuss and consolidate the common problems of practice of community teachers who taught at different schools and levels, community teachers read the book The Teaching Gap by Stigler and Hiebert (1999), watched the lesson videos from different countries recorded in the scope of the TIMSS Video Study (http://www.timssvideo.com/), and reflected on their own experiences as teachers in Turkey in light of the arguments in the book. Throughout our problem identification sessions, one question that teachers raised dominated our discussions: There was a widely admitted public opinion in Turkey that mathematics teaching needed to be improved, but what was the common goal of mathematics educators in Turkey while working toward improving mathematics education in the country? This question was not sufficiently discussed in public. As teachers read the book, watched the lesson videos, and discussed their common problems of practice, they identified many aspects of the dominant teaching culture of their country that inhibited students’ access to learning environments in which they could make sense of mathematics. This led them to take a fresh look at the “Teaching Program,” also known as “curriculum,” that the Turkish Ministry of Education has published: What type of vision did this resource draw for teachers? Did it provide a vision that challenged these problematic cultural norms so that teachers could overcome them in their classrooms and collaborate with their colleagues toward improving their practice?
Community teachers concluded that it was hard to make sense of the curriculum for teachers with its current format since it did not clearly articulate a pedagogical vision that mathematics educators could work toward achieving in their practice. The objectives were listed according to grades; however, the part shared for the common and subject-specific goals included broad and vague sentences without references to the scientific resources that helped curriculum designers write these objectives. In that regard, their curriculum could not support mathematics educators meeting around a common discourse. The long-term goal of the community was to design mathematics lessons together; however, without a common pedagogical orientation, or, in other words, a common understanding of what good mathematics teaching is, engaging in such an endeavor would be similar to constructing a building without a foundation. As teachers developed awareness of this issue, the community decided to learn more about other countries’ curriculum structures and to read scientific resources on mathematics teaching and learning so that they could fill this gap and come up with common principles and pedagogical understanding as a community.
The basic resource that they utilized during this phase was Van de Walle, Karp, and Bay-Williams’ seminal book, Elementary and Middle School Mathematics: Teaching Developmentally. This book took NCTM’s Principles and Standards (2000) as a starting point. As a result, we conducted a closer examination of NCTM’s guide. We conducted discussions focusing on the first three chapters and compared them to the Teaching Program in Turkey. During these discussions, some features of NCTM’s Principles and Standards, which contradicted their experience with the curriculum they were using in Turkey, caught the attention of the teachers. There were some distinguishing features of this guide that helped educators meet around a common discourse to improve teaching:
- Although traditional cultural codes of teaching in the US, as mentioned in Stigler and Hiebert (1999), do not cohere with the teaching philosophy that NCTM promotes, the Standards document produces a counter discourse and takes a clear, determined reformist position.
- NCTM, as a civil organization, provides an effective compilation of research findings on mathematics teaching and learning in this document in an accessible language for those who are not researchers. Being an independent organization of mathematics educators, it functions independently from state bureaucracy, which protects it from political shifts in the country. It also displays a common attitude among mathematics educators who take science and the universal humanitarian goals of education as their points of departure.
- NCTM has a clear position regarding the pedagogical principles it follows, of which the first one is “equity”, described as “excellence in mathematics education requires equity—high expectations and strong support for all students” (p. 12).
- It provides a clear outline of how objectives are related from kindergarten to 12th grade, helping teachers have a birds-eye view of the mathematics taught, what their students learn in lower and later grades, and the connections among mathematical ideas. In this way, teachers can make sense of the curriculum, and as a result, they become active agents in implementing and improving this common discourse in practice.
This is not an exhaustive list of the important features of NCTM’s Principles and Standards. My goal here is to provide an international perspective that highlights the significance of these aspects, which are considered ordinary in the daily lives of educators in the United States, and above all, to emphasize how NCTM’s Principles and Standards provide a robust framework for not only mathematics educators in the USA but also as a civil organization that has a universal value that helps to develop a common discourse while improving mathematics classrooms all across the world. Since they did this analysis, our community has appreciated the NCTM’s guide and worked to get a deeper understanding of the vision provided in it. We held long discussions on whether this resource responded to community teachers’ own questions and concerns that they have as practitioners in Turkey.
Designing a curriculum that provides a coherent and robust discourse alone cannot serve as a magical solution to the challenges in education. It is crucial to have effective methods of conveying the intentions of curriculum designers in order to achieve the desired goals. Expecting teachers to simply rely on programs by ignoring their agency should not be the way to disseminate the discourse that curriculum designers wish to share. While a robust, scientifically-based curriculum serves as a starting point for change, implementing systemic changes should also involve teacher learning systems that encourage teachers to actively participate in knowledge building and cultural transformation processes. All stakeholders need to collaborate in developing creative ways of designing participatory professional learning environments, enabling a shared discourse to evolve as teachers engage with curriculum resources and as research meets practice. Only this approach empowers teachers to exercise agency, adapt the curriculum flexibly to meet the specific needs of their students, and take control of their own continuous professional learning.
Ball, D. L. & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes and L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
NCTM (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston.
Pepin, B. & Gueudet, G. (2014). Curriculum resources and textbooks in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 132-135). Springer.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.
Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2020). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. Pearson.
GMD and the Blurring of Boundaries
I can’t believe it’s been around five years since I wrote my first GMD post. It all started when Nate Goza reached out to me, via Grace Chen, about writing for the newsletter. Back then, my role was to summarize whatever was going in the world of math ed, particularly from the standpoint of those on math ed twitter through hashtags like #MTBoS. It was one of my first opportunities to be part of a larger professional community outside of my immediate circle. It also marked the beginning of understanding myself as something I’ll tentatively call a “teacher-scholar”.
The term teacher-scholar might be a loaded term. I use it cautiously because it can connote a teacher who is necessarily part of the formal academy. This is not how I want to use the term. To me, a teacher-scholar might be someone who teaches while also staying interested in professional growth, understanding the sociopolitical aspects of schooling and/or maybe keeping up with academic research. I like to think that many, if not most, teachers can be said to be teacher-scholars. Before becoming a teacher, I was a member of a different professional community: the law. I never vibed with that community, probably because I found myself on the business side of things. After leaving the law, I found myself in a world that felt more like home. Maybe this was because of the scholarly orientation of the job. By becoming a teacher, I could become someone committed to a life of curiosity and creativity. In law, I could become immersed in critical race theory or feminist legal theory. But at the end of the day, I had to go back to the office and give advice to corporate clients based on the same set of statutes and case law. In the classroom, ideas like culturally responsive-sustaining education were not just interesting in their own right; they became necessary for thinking about my role as a teacher, how I interacted with my students, and how I planned for instruction on a daily basis.
This is where the GMD and larger math edutwitter space come in. I learned about ideas like culturally responsive/relevant/sustaining education in these spaces during my first few years of teaching. The ideas of culturally responsive/relevant/sustaining education come from the writings of incredible people like Gloria Ladson-Billings, Geneva Gay, Django Paris, and Samy Alim. But access to these ideas requires an awareness that they exist, and then in many cases it requires digital access to journal articles through a university account (email me for article requests!). The GMD newsletters, webinars, and twitter chats were there for anyone to access. Granted, math edutwitter is an imperfect space and access to the resources it offers is not universal — it is at the end of the day a mostly young-ish crowd, tech savvy, and likely predominantly white, with many “sub-communities” who have thrived in the face of these realities. Nevertheless, the GMD was an incredible place—for me, and hopefully for others—to start to nurture a scholarly approach to teaching that did not require a formal affiliation with the academy.
As it turns out, I ended up pursuing a doctorate in education. 😅. In hindsight, the GMD and math edutwitter bears a not insignificant responsibility for that decision. Being on the inside, so to speak, has allowed me to see in even clearer terms how the academy can be separated from the everyday work of teachers. For structural reasons tied to culture and capitalism, the output and currency of most academic research comes in the form of journal articles. Many of these articles can only be accessed by other academics through subscription access or the purchase of books that are sometimes $100+. Yes, you can and should reach out to authors to ask if they would be willing to send you a PDF copy of their work. But not everyone will, or even can, overcome that interactional friction. Hence, what results is the first and very real wall of separation between the academy and the rest of the world. Elsevier and others, I’m looking at you!
Paywalls are just one aspect of this separation. The language of many journal articles can be obtuse and overly reliant on knowledge of theories and concepts found in other journal articles. To understand X article, you need to read A, B, C theory just to understand what is going on [is academia the original MCU?!]. For better or worse, this might be a symptom of the advice that I received about journal article writing: when submitting an article for publication, make sure it is part of a broader academic conversation. Cite the relevant literature. Keep it under 9,000 words. The result is a potentially wonderful piece of work with terribly dense language that seems to enter an existing conversation mid-stream. The format is often standardized in a way that makes it easier for other academics to read but can be an obstacle for everyone else. Every article seems to conclude with super interesting “more research is required” questions that you may never see or, more likely, may never hear about until three years after those ideas are first introduced at a conference with a $350 registration fee, not excluding hotels, airfare, and food. Oh, and all the articles are only available in English.
The GMD blurred a lot of boundaries. It was a healthy mix of K-12 teachers and university academics, with a leaning toward academics near the end, perhaps as some of us switched over to graduate school. The conversations that folks were having through the newsletter and the webinars were beyond what I was exposed to at my school’s PD sessions. They were deep topics covered at a level of depth that I did not necessarily “grow out of” once I went to graduate school. Ideas like open middle problems, critical data consumption, coded language, and humanizing mathematics have stuck and will continue to stick with me. Even the latest GMD newsletter article–with discussions of concepts like data feminism and black feminist mathematics pedagogies–continues to blow me away. These ideas are being shared in a freely available platform by a team of volunteers. Should people be compensated for their labor? Absolutely. But to the extent that the GMD came together because of folks who were so passionate about their ideas that they wanted to share it in this venue, then what the GMD achieved is absolutely incredible.
The GMD was a special place to nurture a spirit of teaching-scholarship. It blurred boundaries between the everyday work of teaching and the too often unscalable walls of the ivory tower. I’ll be forever grateful for the opportunities I had to experiment and share ideas. So to anyone reading this, I just wanted to say thanks for everything.
|Some Things Can’t be Washed Away
Contributed by Carl Oliver
It’s wild to think I’ve been a part of the Global Math Department for over a decade. I watched, and participated in the webinars before the 2013-2014 school year. The technology at that time was amazing. The idea that talks from other educators could be on video was impressive, and we could watch these live! You could also communicate with the other math teachers watching. The chat resembled a exclusive twitter-chat for people watching. The talks meant a lot for my growth as a teacher. It was very well organized with new talks coming week after week. This is very similar to sidewalk chalk parties outside of my building (stick with me).
On our sidewalk a Mom from nextdoor would always go outside of my dinner and create these elaborate sidewalk chalk obstacle course drawings with her kids. One might say “…jump 10 steps, walk backwards, do hopscotch…” Kid would do the course, and then they can get chalk and add more obstacles. When I would come down with my kids she would let them know they could appreciate the art work, they could run on the course, but they could help make it, too. “Hi, here’s a piece of chalk… You can start right over here. We’re drawing unicorns, but you can draw whatever you want!” Sure enough, my kids would be immersed in extending the course and would run through the course over and over. My experience with GMD seemed a lot like these sessions. You could appreciate the webinars, you can read people’s thoughts, but you can help make it, too.
Towards the end of that school year, Michael Pershan “handed me a piece of chalk.” He invited me to give a talk, encouraging me to talk about, “Anything that you’d be excited about.” I was thrilled and immediately thought of something different. With the help of Michael and Chris Robinson and Megan Hayes-Golding I was all set to present my talk “Economica! Using economics as a context for math exploration.” It was a quiet evening in June, but it was hugely empowering. I would end up doing even more stuff with the GMD. Later that year joined the board. I wrote for the Newsletter with Megan Schmidt, and I took over hosting the website and still host it today (sorry it’s not updated).
Eventually rain comes to ruin every great chalk drawing. For me, the rain clouds started forming when I had two young kids, whose bedtime routines were…active…, and also in direct conflict with GMD sessions. It didn’t help that I also became an administrator at my school and had a lot more on my plate. The pandemic magnified both of these things. Aside from working with Leigh, Nate, and Amanda about the website, I kind of fell out of touch with everything. I couldn’t believe when Leigh told me a few months ago that the rain clouds are coming for the GMD as a whole. It was hard to imagine that this is the last year of the Global Math Department, but it must have been even harder for the current leadership to make that call. Rain clouds can wash away amazing pieces of art and evidence of community work, but they can also leave behind opportunity.
It wasn’t long after hearing from Leigh that I was taking my kids out to play in front of our building for the first time since the winter. It was also the first time since the Mom from next door moved out of the neighborhood. I sat there for a while thinking about how to explain that they won’t have someone to coordinate the drawing, and start off a chalk obstacle course. There’d be no one to hand them a piece of chalk. Then I thought about new teachers at our school and how they won’t have GMD to rely on like I did as a young teacher. No institution to connect them with a community to show them ideas to help their teaching and give them a chance to take on a leadership role and support the growth of other teachers.
In the few minutes that passed while I was staring into space, figuring out what to say, my girls had already got party started. They already found chalk, started drawing and even pulled in a new girl from down the street. The kids all worked on making their own version of an obstacle course full of new ideas. I jumped in and we kept adding parts of the course until it extended to the front of the neighbors old building, and then it looped back around so they could run it again and again. I was glad that we could keep the spirit of my neighbor alive, and I realized that some people could do the same for the global math department. Out of the hundreds (thousands?) of teachers touched by Global Math Department, hopefully someone new will step up and keep the spirit alive, but renew it as well.
Thanks Global Math Department for all the years of new ideas, inspiration and connection. It’s sad to see it come to an end, but I’m excited to see a new crop of teachers come up with something else in the years to come.
Final Thoughts from the Final Curator
Crafted with much trepidation and not much writing experience by Nate Goza
Hi I’m Nate. I’m a high school math teacher and the only “editor” left at GMD. It’s been that way for a while now. It’s a long story…
I started editing for GMD in November of 2016. At the beginning of the 2018 school year, I took over the lead role for the Newsletter and took up a spot on the GMD Board of Directors. Shout out to Brian showing me the ropes and giving me the opportunity, to Leigh and Marissa for being so great to me, to Dylan for reaching out initially, and to Michael for starting the Newsletter in the first place. At some point we changed my title to “curator.” That’s because I never edited anything. I just collected the articles from our fabulous writing teams and shared them with the world.
Six and a half years of volunteering is a long time. We’re at the end now, and as the final Newsletter approaches, I wonder, should I write something??
Certainly, there are many things I could write about… 🤔…
I could write about my experience with the Newsletter and how things went after I took the lead role. I would thank Grace for connecting me with Marian and Melvin who helped me fill out the writing teams in the beginning. Marian was incredible at elevating voices, and she helped connect us with Lauren and Hema who contributed so SO much. Melvin was an incredible writer and advocate for the Newsletter. He helped with the Twitter account and even took up a role on the Board for a time. I would thank Mathew for all his great articles and for helping to make space for Hema and her incredible voice. I would thank Hema for all her help too, for the amazing pieces she contributed, and for bringing in Sara whose writing blew me away every time. The Newsletter was a lot of work for me but getting to read Sara, Melvin, Lauren and Hema’s articles made it all worth it!
I would certainly thank Benjamin for all he did on Twitter to bring eyes to the operation, for writing so many great pieces, bringing in guests, and for helping to craft our Solidarity Statement (linked below). I would try my best to show appreciation and admiration for Christelle’s perspective, Diana’s caring voice, and Idil’s and Janaki’s incredible contributions. Amber was so great and so consistent for so long. Lani and the Project Sigma crew were so generous in sharing their incredible research. So many amazing folks who contributed on a regular basis like Howie, John, and Brett. Of course, I would personally thank Chase and Casey for writing and then curating with me back when we used to call it editing. They kept at it for years and well into the pandemic and were both so great and contributed so much to the community. I’d have to mention all the guest writers too, and all the people who came before me that made it possible. Whoa! No way I could do that and give everyone their due. 😣
I could write about the difficulty we had keeping the Newsletter going during the pandemic. I mean, I was freaking out. District telling me to switch to online, downloading Zoom, students messaging me, a 4-year old and a 1-year old wildin’ out in the living room, and I’m like, “What’s going to happen with the Newsletter?!” And then we just kinda kept it going! It’s amazing to me. Credit to everyone who was involved at the time. I don’t know how we did it. I’ll never forget how, when we were short on articles for the March 17th edition, Lauren wrote a whole Newsletter on her own!
Then, a couple months later, in the wake of George Floyd’s killing our writing team constructed a Statement of Solidarity and doubled down on our mission to do better. When we returned the following fall we were stronger and better than ever. The world was sick (COVID raged on) and tired (of racism and police brutality), but the Newsletter never flinched. Instead, we grew stronger and had more resolve than ever. That feels like something worth mentioning. I think …
Or, I could write about the amazing articles we’ve had over the last few years. We’ve had incredible writers y’all! I could pull highlights from the last few years and share them. I mean, that’s what the Newsletter was all about when I first started. At that time lots of math educators were starting to blog and tweet and share. The MTBoS was growing and the Newsletter was there to spread the word. Back then it was Michael, Chris, Megan, Carl, Kent, Sahar, Audrey, Jenise, Andrew and Andrew, Ashli, Graham, Brian, and of course Wendy. I’m lucky that I got to edit for Wendy. She was so great. We miss you Wendy.
Over the years a lot of things changed. It became harder to pull highlights from blogs and Twitter, but our writers adapted and found ways to share their own perspectives while still uplifting the words and the work of others.
I’d love to take the opportunity to point folks back to some of my favorite editions:
- The 8/25/20 edition when Lauren wrote about “Seeing Systems” and Sara shared “A love letter to radical math teachers.
- The 11/2/20 edition on Election Day when Melvin asked “Who Counts?” Melvin and Lauren agreed that “Math is Political,” and Hema and Lani reminded us take care of ourselves.
- The 8/24/21 edition with highlights from the 2020-21 school year.
- The 11/30/21 edition with Sara’s powerful interview with Dr. Belin Tsinnajinnie.
- Idil’s #GMD Reflects Series in the 10/5/21, 12/14/21, 2/8/22 and 4/5/22 editions.
- The 5/3/22 edition where Sara shared her journey in Mathematics.
- And so many more …
I could share some of my favorite moments too:
and also from Hema.
So much fantastic content. So many important questions! I was lucky to be the curator, just so I got to read it all, and I always felt blessed to be able to share it with the community. So many great writers. So many great people… 🤯
I could write about my perspective on why the Newsletter stopped running and why the GMD leadership decided to close up shop. That would be tough. It wasn’t easy and it wasn’t what we wanted.
From my perspective it just kind of happened. Or maybe better to say it stopped happening. We could get webinar presenters, but post-pandemic we struggled to get people to come to them. We could get people who wanted to write for the Newsletter, but it was hard for them to find the time and find content to pull from. When the Newsletters went out, they often didn’t get traction, feedback, or interaction. Idil’s #GMDReflects series was amazing, but it didn’t spark the interest it deserved, at least not where I could find it.
I know there are a lot of people out there who love the GMD, but not as many were interacting with content we were putting out, and even fewer were interested in jumping on board to help. Maybe we missed something, maybe we went about it wrong, but we were always asking for help. I don’t think it’s anybody’s fault. It was the natural progression of a volunteer organization that couldn’t find enough volunteers in a profession where the most important players (teachers) don’t have a lot of time to create or interact with the product. I don’t have the answers or know anything, this is just my perspective.
I feel like I deserve some blame too. My hope was to build up an amazing collection of writers and then hand the Newsletter over to them. But as time wore on it became clear that the handoff wasn’t going to be easy. Meanwhile I was worn thin: teaching through a pandemic, raising a family, leading a department, and focusing on my own craft for the sake of the fantastic young people I’ve been blessed to teach. I’m willing to take some blame! But it wasn’t easy…
Should I write about that? Feels a little scary.
If I did write anything, I would HAVE to thank ALL THE PEOPLE.
And why am I thanking them? Personally?? I mean, it was never about me. But, then again, I guess it kinda was. If the Newsletter failed to go out on a given week whose fault would that be. For me, it felt like mine. So every time someone crafted an article it meant that another week had gone by where I hadn’t messed tit up! And every time that article was really good (our writers started made a habit of this) it made me feel like we were doing something good or even great. And so, I’m forever grateful and appreciative of the folks who wrote and curated with me over the years.
I’m also immensely grateful for the relationships that we built over the years. There’s a special place in my heart for every educator I’ve worked with on this project. I guess that’s why this tweet stung a bit. Maybe we weren’t a community like the MTBoS or the TMCers, but we were something. For a while there, I think we were really something! I mean, here are the archives, there is some PD gold in there! If you just tuned in for the finale, GO BACK and watch [read] the seasons!!!
If I did write anything I would want to remind everyone that the writers were volunteering their time and energy to help and grow the entire community. They didn’t do it for me (obviously), they did it for us all! We should all thank them. And if we are thanking them, I’d have to name them. The more I think about it, I really would have to name everyone. I could go through the archives. It would only take a couple of hours. Those folks deserve their flowers for all the work they put in for the community! I’d have to try …
Oh man. No way I could write anything. I’d have to write everything!
I’m scared to write anyway. Writing is hard. I’d probably say “amazing” and “incredible” like 1000 times. Shout out to the writers. So much admiration and appreciation for what they do and what they’ve done for us all.
Lucky for me I’m just the curator. I don’t have to write anything. 😥😅✌️
It only took a couple of hours…
This is every name I could find that either edited or wrote articles in the order they first appeared in the Newsletter, beginning with Michael Pershan, who started it all! These are the folks who made this possible!
Michael Pershan 💐 Chris Robinson 💐 Megan Schmidt 💐 Kent Haines 💐 Carl Oliver 💐 Megan Hayes-Golding 💐Wendy Menard 💐 Sahar Khatri 💐 Audrey McLaren 💐 Andrew Stadel 💐 Andrew Gael 💐 Ashli Black 💐 Graham Fletcher 💐 Jenise Sexton 💐 David Wees 💐 John Stevens 💐 Mike Rosenfeld 💐 Brian Bushart 💐 Matthew Engle 💐 Meg Craig 💐 Chase Orton 💐 Bridget Dunbar 💐 Casey McCormick 💐 Lisa Winer 💐 Steve Gnagni 💐Anna Blinstein 💐 Erick Lee 💐 Matthew Oldridge 💐 Amber Thienel 💐 Rebecca Davis 💐
Continuing in order of appearance I (selfishly) break here, the place in the list where I took on the lead role. An extra flower from me for y’all. It was such a pleasure to be in this space with you. Thank you so so much!
Diana McClean 💐 Howie Hua 💐 Melvin Peralta 💐 Marian Dingle 💐 Becky Bob-Waksberg 💐 Grace Chen 💐 Ilana Horn 💐 Nadav Ehrenfeld 💐 Christelle Rocha 💐 Hema Khodai 💐 Benjamin Dickman 💐 Lauren Baucom 💐 Jessica Moses 💐 Patricia Buenrostro 💐Samantha Marshall 💐 John Rowe 💐 Katherine Schneeberger McGugan 💐 Brette Garner 💐 Bethany Lockhart 💐 Lara Jasien 💐 Karli Orr 💐 Lizi Metts 💐 Allison Krasnow 💐 Sara Rezvi 💐 Nasriah Morrison 💐 Joseph Ochiltree 💐 Paige 💐 Maria Aguilera 💐 Idil Abdulkadir 💐 Courtney Gibbons 💐 Barbara Fantechi 💐 Monica VanDieren 💐 Brendan W. Sullivan 💐 Holland White 💐 Nicole Fletcher 💐 Brandie E. Waid 💐 Dee Crescitelli 💐 Janaki Nagarajan 💐 Brett Parker 💐 Darryl Yong 💐 Shelby Strong 💐 Casey Gordon 💐
I hope I didn’t miss anyone…