Thoughts for April 30--The Last Class

I can't believe this is the last class! The semester has just flown by. The last few weeks have been really interesting as we have gone deeper with the new literacies in technology. I wish we could have a few more weeks to continue this part of the conversation we've had all semester.

The articles this week were very interesting and I could find myself relating to this a bit more. Being that I live daily in these types of activities, (blogs, online communities, etc.) I find it wonderful that researchers are taking a serious look at how they influence lives.

The blogging article was interesting. One thought I had while reading was about Rosie O'Donnell's blog. Her latest video entry talked about the best blogger awards. She was discussing how she wanted to win the award for the best blog. How interesting that our awards are moving with the trends of our communication.

The Smart Mobs article was also interesting. While reading about all these fascinating programs going on around the world, I thought of the recent Virginia Tech shootings. I remember watching the video on TV that had been recorded on a student's cell phone. This short video from this cell phone gave the world in inside look to the terror that occurred on that campus. This in our hands, instant technology has changed us.

Thoughts for April 23

Since I'm writing this after we've had class, I want to just think over thoughts from the reading as well as thought from the class. I have to say, my mind is still taking all of this in and I'm not sure if I really know what I think or feel yet.

The New London Group brought up this idea of "new language" in the beginning of the article. I think as educators, this is a good way of thinking of it. We must be aware that new language are popping up every where that influence how we function day to day. If the purpose of education is to prepare students for higher education or for jobs in the work force, we must prepare them for these experiences. In today's world, that means they must know these new literacies or "new languages" that have emerged over the last few decades.

"Students need also to develop the capacity for speak up, to negotiate, and to be able to engage critically with the conditions of their working lives" (p. 13). The part I worry the most with in this statement in the ability to "engage critically." I fear that the high-stakes testing world we live in doesn't prepare students to think critically. Ultimately, I believe this leads us to not properly preparing them for the real work and the work place that lies ahead of them.

I think an important thing that needs to change, but is the hardest thing to change is out mentality. I think we as educators have to change the way we think and trule evaluate our purpose and what we are doing. Of course I do not hold any answers on the best way to do this. I do know what I can do for myself. The first and biggest step I've taken is to be aware. With my new awareness, I have to get out of my own comfort zone and learn some new things. I need to learn and grow with my students. I believe that holds great power.

Thoughts for April 16

I enjoyed these readings. I enjoyed the second reading that was online because I felt it was a good refresher of what we talked about earlier in the semester. It was nice to read it and understand what was being talked about. I even felt myself drawing things from it that I could have used to answer my first question on the mid-term!

Yes there were certain quotes that stood out to me, but there was a common thought I had throughout both readings was about bringing in these new literacies that are literally changing everyday into the classroom. I thought back to a comment that I believe Amy made during a previous class about more experienced teachers having to learn new technologies. I know that many teacher are resistent to these technology changes because of their unfamiliarity with technology. So it caused me to ask a few questions.

I guess the big question is how do we educators keep up with the fast paced changes that are being made with technology? How much of it do we have to know in order to help our students learn and understand these new literacies? Do you have to know a lot or do we just need to have an understanding of how important they are and be able to explain that to our students? I think of myself: I feel I know a good amount about technology and can certainly do what I need to do. But I know that just when I feel like I know what I need to know, ten more things have popped up and I'm behind already. Hence, why I have so many choices for my multiliteracy final activity. So I just wonder how much do I need or have to know in order to help my students?

Anyway, I do like how these readings and this topic got me thinking. I'm looking forward to our conversation about it. Plus, I'm really excited about the project and learning something new. I've started and experienced that fearful feeling of having no idea what I'm doing! I love people who are patient and can explain things clearly!!!

Thoughts for April 2

These were interesting readings. The online reading completely confused me and frustrated me. I was so afraid I was missing something. I felt so out of control.

As I was reading the article about instant messaging, I kept thinking about how texting on cell phones has started to take the place of some instant messaging. Since the article collected data in the 1990s, I thought of how in the beginning of this new millennium, cell phones have started to take on the role of instant messaging. I think that could be in interesting study.

For me, IM was a critical part of keeping my social circles together. With my friends all over the world, this was so crucial in helping us stay in touch. It truly made the world smaller for our benefit.

In my psycholinguistic class, we conduct classes on an instant message software. I find these synchronous discussions to be interesting. Inconvenient at times, but still interesting.

The powerpoint article was also intriguing. It made me aware of somethings that I had never truly thought about. I think it's interesting to think how this type of tool can shape minds. As a teacher, I used powerpoint with my first graders to provide visual images of what we were studying. During our Ancient Egypt unit, I put together pictures on a powerpoint presentation to help the children see and understand this world we were learning about.

Thoughts for March 26

These were great readings! Since I am part of a generation that grew up with TV more than radio, I found these articles very interesting.

Johnson's article was very interesting and I enjoyed reading about the history of how TV shows have evolved. I find it interesting that the change and development of shows is an indication that "the culture is getting more cognitively demanding" (p. 2). If I watch old re-runs of old TV shows, I do find them simple and boring at times. The comedy shows from years ago are one I enjoy and find that, at times, the humor and jokes are more enjoyable than the comedies today. But when it comes to story line and plot development, I completely agree with Johnson's stance on how they have developed through time. I love how Johnson states that "even the junk has improved!"

I also liked Johnson's concluding thought about having a rating system for mental labor used to watch a TV show. I can see how this could be helpful for parents and it would be interesting to see what items would qualify a show being mentally stimulating. But I agree with his point here completely.

The chapter on Television truly put into perspective how much TV our culture watches. I think I'm in denial about how many years of my total life will be spent watching TV. I know it will be a number that is embarrassing! At this point, I will continue to live in denial and just enjoy myself. I thought the discussion on television discourse was quite interesting. The idea that concepts and thoughts are first produced and encoded, which then must be transmitted and decoded by the viewer. Again, as the great divide theorists believed that a challenge with literacy was the readers need to infer the authors intentions, the same must be done with the television viewer--he must infer the intended meaning of the producer. And many TV shows have flopped because this has not be done well or the producer did not present a show that had enough mental stimulation.

This leads me to continue to think about the phenomenon of reality shows. I'm sure it's the unpredictability of them that engages people. Or just the fact that it is reality and not a made up world, although some reality shows have crossed this line in my opinion.

I find it interesting to look at soap operas to see how they have always had this complex story line. The chapter on Television had an interesting example with 'Dallas.' I can say that I would probably not admit to liking any soap operas, but secretly watch one just because I must know what will happen next and who will marry who. These shows with multiple story lines and characters have survived well. And they are intriguing!

Thoughts for March 19

I have to say that I enjoyed these readings more than I thought I would. The idea of copyright seemed like such a boring topic, but I learned so much and am interested in discussing this topic more.

Lessig's chapter from "Free Culture" was very interesting. Reading about the history of copyright laws in the US was fascinating and it opened my eyes to new thoughts. I do feel as though it is a conspiracy for big businesses who dominate the market to fight for laws that continue to give them more money. Heck, in 95 years, if people even remember who you are, no one will care what you wrote! (Ok, so this may be stretching it, but hopefully you get my point.)

I think it's interesting to consider how these laws might effect control of culture and control of publishing. Lessig states, "the English limited the term of copyright so as to assure that a few would not exercise disproportionate control over culture by exercising disproportionate control over publishing" (p. 131). Yet, with all the laws that have been added and the changes to copyright laws that have been added over the years, I still question whether a large minority are trying to control culture. It's an interesting thought.

I agree with Lessig's claim that this must be rethought because of the Internet and changes in technology in society. This has revolutionized how information is distributed and everyone involved should sit and re-evaluate how these laws fit into this new literacy. In some ways I don't feel they can have the kind of control they would like and I don't feel they should be allowed to have this kind of control. A good discussion point though.

I laughed out loud when Lessig described how some of his e-books have the disclaimer that they cannot be read aloud. Seriously! What is the world coming to?!

I loved Lessig's final statement: "The opportunity to create and transform becomes weakened in a world in which creation requires permission and creativity must check with a lawyer" (p. 173).
Certainly something to make one think.

I did find Shannon's article interesting. I enjoyed the viewpoint of looking at what is going on with education and curriculum from a Marxists view. I felt he made some valid points and I must say I agree with his feelings on these scripted programs.

Thoughts for Feb. 26

These three readings for this week were very interesting.

Haas' "The Technology Question" brought up some very good questions about literacy and technology. It is true that they are connected and that the use of technology can shape human culture and consciousness. I liked how the chapter was broken up into three different areas to focus the questions on. I found Plato's critique of writing to be most interesting. Certainly not a view I had ever thought to look at before. I was slightly confused by Haas' comparison of Plato's and Derrida's critiques. Hopefully that will be something we can discuss in class.

"Writing has been closely associated with death, as in the notion of a lifeless written text, but this lifeless object can also be perpetually 'resurrected into limitless living contexts'" (p. 9). Wow! Certainly not a thought I have had before. What an interesting perspective. I think that's a great image. It's true that writing can be lifeless and like death, but that a reader can resurrect it into life. I just love that! What power that gives me as a reader!

I found the three myths about technology also interesting. I realized that I held some of these myths as well. I think I've assumed that technology is transparent and that it's still writing. I've never stopped to think that maybe this use of technology has more impact that I first thought. I see now how that belief can cause complications.

Eisentein's article about the printing press was fascinating. I loved her perspective and outlook on the effect of the printers even before the printing press came to be. I liked her statement that the advent of printing moved Europeans from an image culture to a work culture, but at the same time from a word culture to an image culture. Again, I had never truly thought how the advent of printing allowed mathematicians and scientists to create images to convey meaning. Now obscure definitions and explanations were no longer the only option in explaining. Images were being used to explain as well.

Again, I was intrigued by the information about how printing changed the Christian world. It amazes me how much of an influence this had on the history of Protestantism and Luther's break from the Catholic church.

I felt Bomer's article help make me more aware of things as a teacher. It is true that these tools, including pillows, can have an effect on literacy.

"What I do with this tape dispenser right now says something about the social world I think I am in, and who I am in it" (p. 243). By observing how my students use different tools in the classroom I can learn so much about them and their identity. Yet, I have never even thought of this possibility. I do recall times when kids amazed me at other uses they could find for certain objects, but never really thought much of it.

Everything we have read so far is slowly starting to come together and sink in for me. I must say I'm relieved about that! I'm seeing how this all connects to what I know about teaching and how it can help me continue to grow professionally.

Thoughts for Feb 19

This second week in Olson's book was not as easy as the first. At times I found myself overwhelmed with names and theories and wasn't always sure of what was going on.

I feel like I could summarize a few chapters by saying that writing can never show the true intentions of what the author was meaning and that, as readers, we must be aware that true meanings and expression cannot be conveyed accurately.

I do need to say that the Peanuts comic on pg. 125 gave me a good laugh! I know some people who are so concerned with being understood correctly that they really speak like this.

Chapter 7 had some interesting points as Olson laid out the history of reading. I found the most connection with the history of reading the Bible. Being familiar with the history of reading instruction in America, I know the influence religious texts had on reading education.

"The history of reading is largely the history of attempting to cope with what writing does not represent" (p. 145). I found this statement to be one that made me stop and think for a moment. It reminds me of what some people brought up in class a few weeks ago about students who can decode words, but do not comprehend what they read. It is true that understanding and interpreting writing is a large part of reading. As readers, we do have to cope with the fact that writing does not give expression or full intentions of the author. Anyway, an interesting point.

I also found it interesting to read about the theories about reading. For example, the fact that in Medieval times, individuals felt the purpose of reading was to see the spirit of the text. As a protestant Christian, I also found the parts describing Luther's beliefs interesting. This feud of whether Biblical text should be taken literally or in context is still a debate today. Many theological arguments between denominations is based on this.

Moving into chapter 9: I am intrigued with this thought of written texts being used for memory purposes. I know many times, that is why I write things down: so I don't forget them! I feel I rely on written text more for memory than people in the early middle ages did.

I believe I understand the relationship Olson is showing between pictures, diagrams, maps, and formulas to texts. It was interesting to read about how early explorers created maps with their own mental concepts and images.

I still would like to discuss more about this concept of subjectivity. I was slightly confused by Olson introduction in chapter 11 and would like to talk with others about what they gathered from that chapter.

Thoughts for Feb. 12

I have to say that I was surprised by the fact that the reading was easier than I expected. Yet, even though I was able to read the words, I know I did not comprehend everything Olson was describing.

I think he brings up some interesting points in regard to literacy and I found myself thinking more about things that are so normal and everyday. I do believe that we place writing language and being literate above speech. It seems to be a way we grade countries on how advanced they are. If the people are illiterate, then something needs to be done! So reading Olson's viewpoint allowed me to think more about things I just accepted.

I would like more explanation and clarification on the theories of literacy and mind from Levy-Bruhl and Scribner and Cole. Like I said to a friend, "I can read the words on the page, but I'm not very sure on what they really mean." I think some more background information on these theories will help me understand more from that chapter especially.

"Nor is the simplicity of the alphabet the major cause of high levels of literacy; many other factors affect the degrees of literacy in a country or in an individual. Finally, our tardy recognition of the literacy levels of non-alphabetic cultures, especially the Japanese who routinely out-perform Western children in their literacy levels (Stevenson et al., 1982) has forced us to acknowledge that our view of the superiority of the alphabet is, at least in part, an aspect of our mythology" (p. 9). I have to say I was relieved to know that Olson is also looking at non-alphabetic languages. Having grown up surrounded by Chinese characters, I think we should take a close look at this type of writing system and see how it might change our own views on literacy. This was one of those, mmmmm moments for me. Interesting!

"For the first time, many scholars are thinking the unthinkable: is it possible that literacy is over-rated?" (p. 13). Certainly an interesting question to tackle. This reminds me of some of the critical theorists and the power struggle. Yet, what would our world be like without written language and literacy?

"Learning to read and write is at best a mere introduction to the world of literacy" (p. 41). This was a aha statement for me. It is true that as an elementary teacher this was the focus of what I did throughout the day. Yet, do we get so focused on these two elements that we forget everything else involved with being a literate person? Is this like the focus on decoding and forgetting that the word holds meaning? It certainly made me think.

"Literacy is not just a basic set of mental skills isolated from everything else. It is the competence to exploit a particular set of cultural resources. It is the evolution of those resources in conjunction with the knowledge and skill to exploit those resources for a particular purpose that makes up literacy" (p. 43). One thing graduate school has helped me see is an expanded view on the definition of literacy. It encompasses much more than I first thought.

". . . representation is never equivalent to the thing represented. If so, it is a serious mistake to think of written representations as transparent or neutral" (p. 63). I think this is true. Often times I read something and am ignorant of the fact that it is taking a side. It looks safe in print. It looks less intimidating, less in your face. Sometimes the only way I know that text is so much more than mere words is when that text is read to me with expression and emotion. I don't think text that ever replace or fully represent speech. That is why every book I read, I will have a different experience with it than someone else. I give meaning to words and read with certain expressions in my head.

Overall, I found myself more stimulated than I first thought with this book. Yet, there are still things I need clarification on. I know the discussion in class today will hopefully help clear up some of my confusion.

Thoughts for Feb. 5

I'll start off by addressing my thoughts on the storytelling assignment. As I listened to several recordings of people telling stories, I was struck with a few thoughts. First of all, much of the structure that one would expect to find in a story was there: there was a beginning, middle, and end. The first thing that jumped out at me was the use of pauses. Depending on the story, pauses were used in two different ways: to add something to the story, or they were not used at all. For example, one time when I was the storyteller, I rarely used pauses. My excitement over came me and my sentences ran into one another. You couldn't always tell where a thought ended and another thought started. Yet some of the stories were filled with many pauses adding anticipation and suspense. Another thing that stood out to me was the use of nonsense words. When telling a story orally, all the storytellers inserted nonsense words, such as like, so, ok, and um, frequently. Sometimes they appeared more than once in each sentence and sometimes just every few sentences or so. If these stories were being written down, these words would not have been used. The third thing that stood out to me was the use of voices. Each storyteller would alter his/her voice either to imitate someone or emphasis a point. That manipulation occurred more frequently in storytelling than in informal conversation.

Moving on to some readings.......

I found myself struggling through the Bauman and Briggs article. Since this is my first dip into the world of linguistics, I found some of the technical terms tricky. Yet in my struggle I didn't give up and tried to make sense of it the best I could. I found the introduction interesting as aspects of performance were being described and, in a sense, compared to more informal talk.
I felt at a disadvantage not being familiar with many of the authors who were cited throughout the article. My background knowledge, or should I say lack of background knowledge, hindered me from fulling grasping certain concepts.

"Participation structure, particularly the nature of turn-taking and performer-audience interaction, can have profound implications for shaping social relations" (p. 63). This statement caused me to stop and think for a moment. I took this to mean that culture has a profound impact on how the interaction will be interpreted. Since cultural structures can affect how a conversation might go about taking turns, or what is acceptable norms in conversation, these cultural structures will influence how the performance is understood. Performance will look different in different cultures due to different cultural norms.

I still feel as though I need more clarification about entextualization. I can read the simple definition provided on pg 73, but as I continue to read, I'm still not too sure what that looks like. Since I always benefit greatly from oral conversation, I'm hoping I will gain more understanding about this article in class.

I'm also looking forward to our guest speaker on Monday. After reading over the summary of the report, many questions and thoughts pop into my mind. With rapidly changing technology literacies, I find this study to be of great significance. I think we in the United States need to do a bit more thinking on how to truly incorporate these new literacies into our schools. The report made me think more about what I might do as a teacher to make sure my students can survive in a technologically literate world. I enjoyed looking at the concept maps the students drew showing their own understanding. I look forward to hearing more about this study and thinking more about this important area.

Readings for Jan 29

I thoroughly enjoyed the Agar article. I find it fascinating to read about other cultures and to see you what seems normal to me, is foreign and odd to someone else. It's amazing how people from two different cultures can interpret a pause so differently.

I loved the concept of Garfinkeling! I can think of people who Garfinkel and throw me off from the normally expected structure of a conversation. Actually, one of my good friends just called me and she Garfinkeled on the phone. I said hello and she immediately went off into her own thought and story. It always throws me off guard for a second, but since we are so close and I know her, it doesn't really bother me. It's funny how Garfinkeling is more acceptable with people you know well. If a stranger Garfinkeled, it would take me a much longer time to recover. I used the opportunity to explain to her the concept of Garfinkeling. Now we are keeping score to see who Garfinkels the most.

I found Agar to be an easy read, but very informative at the same time.

Tannen's article was also informative, but I didn't find it as interesting as Agar's. I think part of why I had a hard time being as interested was because I couldn't grasp how the conversation truly went since I was reading a transcript. I'm such an aural learner, that reading a conversation just doesn't do it justice. I wish technology was at a point where sound files could be embedded in an article or book and one could listen while reading the transcript. That would be wonderful! I have a feeling we will get to this point soon.

It was interesting to read Tannen's analysis of the conversation and learn about the various cultures of American conversation structure. One thing that stood out to me was her analysis of overlapping. I could relate it to the transcript of my own conversation. For Tannen, the overlapping was a sign of enthusiasm, interest in the topic, and sign of good rapport (p. 77). I think the same is true of my conversation. The overlapping was a sign of enthusiasm, interest, and rapport between both speakers.

I did struggle with Schegloff and Sacks. I understood it better than I thought I would, but still felt there were times of "too much information." It did cause me to reflect on my own conversation closing techniques. I know closing a conversation "properly" is very important in my conversation structure. For example, I told the story in class about how I called a friend back just to say goodbye. We had been talking and were coming to the closing comments when the call was dropped. I called her back, literally, just to say goodbye. I couldn't let the conversation end without those words. I didn't want her to think I had hung up on her or had been mad. I just had to say goodbye.

While reading Schegloff and Sacks' article, I couldn't help but do some reflection and think more about how I close a conversation. There are lots of times when I say, "I gotta go." I feel that directly lets the other person know that the conversation needs to end. I also recall times where I feel like I've run out of things to say and immediately go to, "Well, OK...... So I guess I'll talk to you later." I think I'm curious to know more about how people close a conversation when they are having a conversation with a person they really don't want to be talking to. Sometimes I run into people at the store and I say hello to be polite, but I don't really want to talk. That usually ends up being the person who jumps into some long, drawn out story and wants to chat for a while. My mind is always quickly racing for closing statements in order to get out of the conversation. I am curious to know more about how closing comments might be different for people in the "flight" mode compared to people who are enjoying the conversation.

Overall, very interesting readings and I look forward to discussing them in more detail in class.

Thoughts about my informal conversation

(I'm still figuring out how this blog works, so you will find the transcript posted below this posting.)

Even with the tediousness of creating a transcript, I thoroughly enjoyed this assignment. I have complete sympathy for people who spend many hours transcribing audio or video files!

It was so much fun to listen to this conversation over and over and think about all that occurred. First of all, I think I shocked myself with the things I discovered about this conversation. For example, I really couldn't believe how much interrupting and overlapping there was. (Should I be ashamed that most of it was me?!) Yet it was completely acceptable in this situation. No one was upset and no one certainly stopped contributing to the conversation because of it.

The greatest difficulty I had in transcribing the conversation was how the physical movements, facial expressions, and body language were nearly impossible to replicate in the transcript. Now, if I had many more hours and a detailed system (as Agar used in his article), I might have been able to be more accurate, but it would have taken another page of writing to explain all the symbols. The one element I could not put into the transcript was voice tone. There were times when sarcasm was used and I couldn't quite figure out how to represent that. So I know the transcript doesn't do the conversation justice.

I found many adjacency pairs in our conversation. When D was asking me questions about the parking meter, I always gave an answer to her question and vice versa. That structure was certainly present. Both structures that Agar mentions are present in this conversation--shift of topic and turn taking. Our turn taking was predictable and when the topic shifted we both went with it. No one seemed offended or upset if a prior topic was never revisited.

One thing stands out to me about how this informal conversation is different from more formal ones. I first need to state that the beginning portion of this conversation was taking place in a car. D was driving and I was in the front seat. You will notice very quickly that we are looking for a parking space. The rest of the conversation then took place on the sidewalk by the parking meter. Something that stands out in my mind about this conversation is the small amount of eye contact that took place. Now when she was driving, of course there was good reason for her to not constantly look over at me. Yet even when we had exited the car, there still was not constant eye contact like you might expect to find in some conversations, such as an interview. We were very comfortable looking at other things, such as the coin purse or umbrella, instead of each other. Yet we still knew that the other was paying attention and was very involved in the conversation. In no way do I believe either of us were being rude, it just came with the fact that we were so comfortable with each other.

Another thing that amazed me was how many sentences were never completed, yet we both knew what the other was saying or would have said anyway. The meaning was never lost. Again, I believe in a more formal setting, this would not have happened or would have at least occurred very rarely.

Timing was also a unique facet of the conversation. I was amazed at how long some of the pauses were in the middle of a thought. I know that some of the pauses were because D was busy digging out change from her coin purse. Yet the pauses didn't make her lose her train of thought or prevent me from understanding what she was trying to say. The pauses were much more noticeable and annoying when I was listening to the recorded conversation.

I feel like I'm much more aware of my conversational habits and can see how informal conversations differ from more formal ones. I look forward to reading your comments.

Informal Conversation Transcript

Below you will find the transcript of a three minute informal conversation I had with a friend on Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2007 at 12:37pm.

E: Well how were you’re . . . did both sons call you or just

D: Actually, they, yes, both ended up

E: How are they?

D: Um.. Ben I actually got to talk to. Matthew, he called as I was trying to get ready and I said, “Honey I gotta go.” I’m gonna be late. (Pause) Umm

E: (interrupting) Well everyone’s down here.

D: Uh-huh. (Pause) Uh (9 second pause ) So (5 second pause)

E: There’s one.

D: I guess we’ll park here. What does it say, Elizabeth?

E: Uh…(3 secs) I don’t know. I think….

D: (2 sec pause) Does it say three hours?

E: (pause) Probably. Aren’t all these meters three hours?

D: I don’t know.

(2 second pause)

E: There’s the Stephen F. Austin building wasn’t that what that guy was looking for? (laughing)

D: Yes! How interesting.

E: (overlapping) The guy who thought I looked like I…..had been here a long time.

D: I loved it!

E: (interrupting) Do I, do I really look like…..you know?

D: No, (E: I just find that hilarious.) but I loved it!

E: (overlapping) It’s so funny. I was crackin’ up. Just like yesterday at the school….I walked in, um, and this little girl looks at me and she said, “Are you so and so’s grandmother?”

(D and E laughing, 4 seconds)

D: Is that precious or what?

E: And I was like, uh…, no

D: Is that precious or what?

(Lots of background noise. D and E are getting out of the car, 5 secs)

D: Ok

(8 second pause. D and E close car doors.)

E: You and your little bag. (2 second pause) Your little coin bag.

D: (overlapping) It doesn’t say but I’m sure it is. (Pause) Let’s just see how OH that was another thing I did yesterday. I kept putting quarters in reah…after I don’t know how many quarters I put in, I realized that I was in a thirty minute limit

E: (interrupting) Oh no, it didn’t give you your quarters back?

D: (pause) No-oh (drawn out and your face had the expression, You’ve got to be kidding me)

E: That’s horrible.

D: No, it just kept taken’em.

E: Talk about highway robbery.

D: I mean, I, but I couldn’t believe how stupid… but it never occurred to me (pause) and then I looked and I went “Thirty! I know I’ve put in (pause) a ton (pause) of money!

(Pause, you can hear coins dropping into the parking meter)

E: (laughing) Look at you!

D: I know (pause) I know. (pause) And I robbed Steve’s (pause) change. (pause) As a matter of fact

E: (interrupting) Oh will it take everything?

D: It takes everything but pennies.

E: Oh.. that’s good to know.

D: Yeah

E: I thought it was just a quarter

D: Noooo….oh no, thank god

E: (overlapping) Oh good.

D: Now let’s see.

E: I was gonna say I have some
D: (interrupting) Nope that’s it, that’s all it will do.