Firstly your response condemned me and in praising Jennifer's work you gave every indication that you supported the time consuming methods described. Secondly I didn't even accuse you outright of advocating her methods I merely said it seemed like you were. Are you seriously going to call everyone who doesn't understand your posts lazy for not checking your vast back catalogue? If you hate people being unclear about your views then you should perhaps write more clearly. For example just in your argument with me you referred to your own posts disapproving of time consuming lesson planning yet condemned me personally for criticising...time consuming lesson planning! Do you agree that Jennifer is wasting her own time or not? If one has misinterpreted what you've said it does not mean one is lying - this is another ad hominem. Your getting angry because I said you 'seemed' to be advocating Jennifer's methods and then come out with this! No not everyone, you Raymond, and JamesTES and anyone else who thinks that the most likely thing to make naughty students kick off is a boring lesson or that a class who will successfully partake in activities from the 'Teachers toolkit' (a book I actually own and like) is, in the greater scheme of things, a challenging class. I've used the term ad hominem several because rather than attack my ideas you have chosen to maliciously attack my character. Also you do realise that, with this latest bout of sarcasm, you have surrendered any moral high ground you might have had when you first accused me of bullying.