3.) Gee’s first theorem is basically that in order to be a part of a discourse you need to be 100% fluent. You are either 100% and included in the discourse or you aren’t, there is no in-between. You cannot be partially or semi-fluent and still fit into the discourse. This could be seen as controversial because many people although not 100% fluent would consider themselves to be a part of or understand certain discourses and this theorem goes against that common belief that you only need to know a certain amount to be considered a member of a discourse. Gee’s second theorem states that a primary discourse cannot be liberating literacy. This is because Primary discourses are both unique and contain only themselves, they can show up in other secondary discourses but a primary discourse can never be liberating as it cannot be a main idea of any other discourse. This could be seen as controversial because some people may believe that a primary discourse can be and have the qualities to be liberating literacy.
4.) Gee states that “mushfake” is “to do with something less when the real thing is not available” (Gee 13) This definition means to improvise, he supports this claim by comparing it to prisoners making hat, “So when prison inmates make hats from underwear to protect their hair from lice, the hats are mushfake.” Gee also defines meta-knowledge as being able to use new knowledge along with prior knowledge. Meta-knowledge helps to analyze situations by combining new knowledge with knowledge you already had in order to better understand a situation. Gee’s final definition is for resistance, in his terms resistance means to have the ability to keep one’s primary discourse while still gaining new knowledge and pieces of other discourses.
5.) One way that the ideas between Gee and Cuddy are related is because they both have similar beliefs when discussing growing and learning to master a situation. Cuddy discusses this by giving the idea of “faking it until you become it” and Gee discusses showing your ability to master a discourse. Another way they are related is that they both touched on the subject of successful students which directly related to the mastery of a situation and subjects. 
They say I say:
1.) It is important to engage with other people’s views because recognizing and using an opposite opinion can strengthen your argument. “If it weren’t for other people and our need to challenge, agree with, or otherwise respond to them, there would be no reason to argue at all. You cannot just simply state what you believe if you want to make a compelling argument, you must propose your ideas as a conversation, ” To make an impact as a writer, then, you need to do more than make statements that are logical, well supported, and consistent. You must also find a way of entering into conversation with the views of others, with something “they say”.”(They say I say, 4)
2.)In chapter 1 the authors discussed the idea of putting other’s views into your writing to strengthen your argument, this is something I had been told to do all throughout my high school writing experience. I believe that using this technique makes your argument more clear and have a stronger point, “The answer is that if you don’t identify the “they say” you’re responding to, your own argument probably won’t have a point.” (They say, I say 4)
3.)
