11:06:07 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	You can now sign up to participate in Week 1 Working Circles.  Sign up to participate here:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17ry5-PdWi2UjPUk_VAHZv9MtkMCc7Fuu0laltWsKcOU/edit#gid=0
11:06:10 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	I'll be releasing more Working Circles as the class continues.
11:07:04 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	We have a Resource Page where you can find references and optional exercises for the course.  I'll be updating it after every session:  http://abtframework.com/abt-framework-student-resource-page-round-36-gh-labs/
11:11:04 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	If all goes well during a Working Circle, you should hardly hear from our structuralists at all.
11:20:28 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	A special world can be a literal special world, like Alice falling into Wonderland, or non-literal.  A married couple who just found out that they are pregnant have just dropped into their own special world.
11:23:28 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Matthew Winkler Video: What makes a hero? – We only watched the first two minutes in class.  Watch this to the end to see how the hero’s journey applies to your life:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hhk4N9A0oCA
11:24:38 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	The ABT is fractal in nature.  Even within the Blue AND section here, you'll find nested ABTs running throughout.
11:25:24 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Here's the pdf version of the 3 Step Blue Card that Randy handed out last week:  http://storycirclestraining.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ABT_3_steps.pdf
11:27:39 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Bankspeak: The Language of World Bank Reports, 1946–2012 – The Literary Lab report on how the World Bank reports are completely unreadable, due in no small part to the overuse of the word “and” to glue together contradicting statements:  https://litlab.stanford.edu/LiteraryLabPamphlet9.pdf
11:30:03 From  Courosh Mehanian (UO)  to  Everyone:
	C
11:30:04 From  Isabel Izek  to  Everyone:
	D
11:30:04 From  davina inslee  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:06 From  Ishan Shah  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:06 From  Veronika Glukhova (she/her)  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:09 From  Chris Bachman She/ her  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:09 From  Michelle Diego-Smith (she/her)  to  Everyone:
	b
11:30:10 From  Anne-Laure Le Ny  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:10 From  Noni  to  Everyone:
	a
11:30:11 From  SteveKern  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:13 From  Wenbo Wang  to  Everyone:
	b
11:30:14 From  EricNalefski  to  Everyone:
	b
11:30:16 From  Xiaohong Zhang  to  Everyone:
	D
11:30:16 From  Julian Atim  to  Everyone:
	C
11:30:17 From  Jade Staley  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:18 From  Cassie Mish  to  Everyone:
	B
11:30:20 From  Kim B (she/her)  to  Everyone:
	d
11:30:23 From  CharlesDelahunt  to  Everyone:
	c
11:31:44 From  SteveKern  to  Everyone:
	I think Randy had said that last week at the end of one session so that was how my guess was correct.
11:31:51 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English is a 7 year foundational study that took a quantitative analysis approach to the English language.  It found that the ideal percentage of Ands in a well edited document tends to converge around 2.5%. https://www.amazon.com/Longman-Student-Grammar-Written-English/dp/0582237262
11:32:27 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Lol, Steve, you cheater!
11:33:13 From  SteveKern  to  Everyone:
	Confessed cheater at least....
11:33:15 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	For the purposes of this class, we consider an And Frequency of over 4% to be deadly levels of boring.
11:33:57 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	You can use this word frequency tool to find the number of Ands in your own document, then divide that by the total number of words to find your And Frequency - https://www.browserling.com/tools/word-frequency
11:34:10 From  Veronika Glukhova (she/her)  to  Everyone:
	are more reports written by non-native English speakers than in the past?
11:34:24 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	A spat over language erupts at the World Bank – The somewhat dismissive Economist article on the “conjunction dysfunction” about the Literary Lab’s report. - https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/05/29/a-spat-over-language-erupts-at-the-world-bank
11:35:14 From  devo brown  to  Everyone:
	Reacted to "Confessed cheater at…" with 😂
11:39:36 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	In a later class, we'll be analyzing abstracts with an eye toward the forces of narrative (agreement, contradiction, consequence) with less focus on the words And, But, Therefore.  We'll see that often the forces are still there, even though the words might not be.
11:41:22 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	It's interesting to think that in other languages, the forces for Agreement, Contradiction, Consequence might still be there even though the typical cue words of And, But, Therefore (or their equivalent in that language) might be absent.
11:42:43 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Okay everyone, feel free to chime in with notes here in chat.  You can consider this practice for your Working Circles starting next week.
11:43:06 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Remember, this is brainstorming, so even if you're not sure about a note, toss into chat anyway.  It might spark an idea for someone else.
11:43:41 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Point A:  Inaccessible knowledge
	Point B:  Accessible knowledge
11:44:28 From  CharlesDelahunt  to  Everyone:
	Can you discuss the functions of the two halves (either side) of the AND. I see part 1 as generic "ordinary world" and part 2 as "great possibility".
11:44:36 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	For your Working Circle, feel free to revise your ABT as much as you'd like beforehand, or use a completely new ABT all together.
11:45:30 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Charles - that's pretty much it!  The second half of the And has to answer the questions "Why should we care?  Why is this important?  What's at stake?"
11:45:57 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	The "great possibility" route, especially with an IF/THEN, is one effective way we've found of answering that question.\
11:47:11 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Another route you could take for the second half of the AND is a "We Know This."  For example:  [Ordinary World] AND We know in that past that when we've done X we've had great results A, B, and C, BUT...
11:47:37 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	*We know in the past
11:49:24 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	The function of the first half of the AND, the Ordinary World, is to give us a basic understanding of what the topic is that we'll be talking about.  Here, you're meant to just introduce us to the "cast of characters," so to speak, which could be an organization, a process, a plan, or whatever else the topic is about.
11:49:51 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Okay everyone, try to answer the question of "What is this a story of?" for this ABT.
11:50:06 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	What is the change from point A to point B that we want to make.
11:51:24 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	You may want to try answering the question of "What's this a story of?" for your own ABTs ahead of time.  There is a HIGH likelihood that Randy will ask you that question during your ABT Build.
11:53:20 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	This, what is happening right now, is EXACTLY the kind of pushback that we like to see during a Working Circle.
11:53:37 From  CharlesDelahunt  to  Everyone:
	Can you speak to the impact of word count in the ABT statement?
11:53:54 From  Amy Wales  to  Everyone:
	Reacted to "Can you speak to the..." with 👍
11:56:49 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	I love this one too.  :)
11:57:00 From  Julian Atim  to  Everyone:
	Reacted to "I love this one too...." with 😂
11:59:24 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Broad to specific, that's the basic patter for the blue, red, and green.
12:00:35 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	Please!  Yes!  Ask questions!  Send us emails!
12:00:42 From  SteveKern  to  Everyone:
	Ishan's ABT is a great example of the fractalness of these kinds of statements.  But Randy's simplification gets to the key singular focus which is REALLY HARD to do, but does really focus the effort.
12:00:46 From  devo brown  to  Everyone:
	Reacted to "I love this one too.…" with 😂
12:02:03 From  Matthew David  to  Everyone:
	100% accuracy is what we want, but let go of 100% precision, like Randy was saying last week.
12:03:32 From  Amy Wales  to  Everyone:
	Thanks!