Q: Creating a self portrait is not your typical selfie! When I taught in the traditional classroom, creating self portraits was something I had students do whether they were four or nine. In fact, I'd have them draw one on the first day of school and one toward the end of the year and to see the change over time was always so interesting. At least once during the year, likely toward the beginning, I would center a lesson around self portraits. In younger classes, there would be more than one. Creating a self portrait teaches students to be aware of themselves. Where is her head in relation to her body? Where are her feet in relation to her legs? It also teaches children spatial awareness. Where should he beginwith his feet or with his head? Where on the paper should his head be placed? How far down should his arms go? How can his whole body fit on a single piece of paper? A Lesson on Creating Self Portraits Whether you are in a classroom, or teaching a child at home, here is a simple lesson on creating self portraits geared toward young children, anywhere from age 2 through age 6. Keep in mind that their final product will show various levels of writing development, depending on what stage of writing they are in. (Basically, a two-year-old's drawing should look very different than that of a five-year-old.) The teacher will need to model how to draw a self portrait. Gather the children around an easel or board and clip a paper to it. Narrate the process as you walk through the steps. "I am going to draw a picture of myself. I am going to start with my head." Use your hands to show your actual head on yourself so students are aware of what you talking about. The visuals also help English Language Learners (if you're teaching in an English speaking classroom.) and build vocabulary for all students. Why should the teacher use their hands when giving instructions? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - so that deaf children understand - so the students are aware of what the teacher is talking about - to make the children laugh
A: so the students are aware of what the teacher is talking about

Q: Called the PURE (Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology) study, this was a very large observational study looking at the link between fat and carbohydrate consumption and longevity in 18 countries across 5 continents. Running for 7 years and involving over 135,000 people, this was a very big study so its conclusions are right to take notice of. The key finding from the work that attracted the most media attention was that a high carbohydrate diet was linked with a higher risk of earlier mortality, whereas total fat and individual types of fat were related to a lower risk of earlier mortality. Digging deeper into the study, the research team found that global diets consisted of 61 percent energy coming from carbohydrates and 24 percent energy from fats. And while those in the highest carbohydrate consumption group (a whopping 77 percent of energy) had a higher risk of earlier death, it wasn't cardiovascular disease they were dying from. What those other causes of death were exactly is unclear. Perhaps getting hit by a car running for a Mars Bar was one of them as a recent commenter on my Facebook page theorised. A paradigm shift? Not quite Does this study turn on its head 'everything we knew about nutrition?' Not quite. And here's why. Before the PURE study, there were many studies showing the opposite link between carbohydrates and longevity. So, when a conflicting study comes along, this grabs the media spotlight for the day. Here is just one example a major systematic review and meta-analysis from 2013 involving 17 individual studies and over 242,000 people showing a higher risk of earlier mortality as carbohydrate intake decreased. And this is the problem at times with observational research in that two studies can give polar opposite results so the findings of the PURE study should be seen through this filter. I'm not going to pick apart the PURE study for its flaws. Such issues are consistent across all observational studies no matter if the conclusions support consensus views or not. What is of value to... When was the study called PURE started? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - 7 years ago - 2 years ago - 4 years ago
A: 7 years ago

Q: I am currently waiting for peer reviews of two books I've worked on: one sole-authored, one co-authored. We don't talk much about the experience of waiting for reviews, and it's not something that appears to have been researched. Yet it's something everyone doing academic work has to go through and it may be bad for our mental health. I'm finding it particularly difficult at the moment because a lot rides on these reviews. The sole-authored book, which is on a contentious topic, has already had one set of reviews. Reviewer 1 was utterly damning, saying "I couldn't find anything to praise". Luckily, Reviewers 2 and 3 were more measured, offering both praise and constructive criticism, and their input helped me to revise and strengthen the typescript. However, in the process, my editor and I realised that we needed further reviews from people with a particular kind of specialist knowledge. My editor approached around ten potential reviewers, but only one agreed to do the job. So I'm gibbering what if that person agrees with Reviewer 1? The co-authored book is in a contentious format. My co-authors and I decided that I would be the person to liaise with publishers, as I have form in this process. The last time I liaised with academic publishers for a co-authored book was in the early 2000s, and I'd forgotten how heavily responsible it makes me feel. Fortunately, I've found a publisher that is interested and has sent the book out for reviews, to two professional academics and two students. This is great and terrifying but at least there are four reviewers. Even so, what if they all think it's rubbish? In many ways I love the peer review system. I welcome feedback on my writing, and I'm not at all averse to constructive criticism. I am by no means arrogant enough to think I can write a good book without input from others. Yet peer review, as a process, is fraught with uncertainty. Comments may not be constructive, or may not come at all. They may be positive, or negative, or in between, or a mixture. The time to write the book probably lasted Pick the correct answer from the following options: - A minute - not enough information - A year - A month
A: A year