Rubiyath wrote about the cycle of poverty, "If all the classes are equal. My question to Tara Mango is: how can families from middle and lower classes pay for all [these programs] expenses...huge amount of taxes...?" Rubiyath is smart to look at economic inequalities, all good historians do.
In 1492, why did the Western Europeans set sail to conquer the world and not the Native Americans, Asians or Africans? The Answer is not that Europeans were smarter, better looking or that God loved them more. The answer is in economic inequalities.
Your assignment is to focus on one of the advantages Europe had in 1492 or on one of the disadvantages facing Native Americans or African. Write about this single advantage or disadvantage: the how and why it lead to European ascendancy. Refer to your class notes, the textbook may or may not be useful I suggest pages 22 - 65, and the videos below are for college level but you may get much out of it. Comment Due Tuesday October 7th.
If you cannot watch this video you may read about it on http://www.pbs.org/gunsgermssteel/index.html
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Monday, September 15, 2008
3. Questioning, Due Thursday
Step 1- Read all the comments from the previous assignment.
Step 2- Choose one comment which is thoughtful.
Step 3-
First, paraphrase the comment you are responding to: For example: “Mr. Baalbaki thinks that…”
Then, write a question about the chosen comment. The question must be: clear, sincere, useful and be the sort of question which leads to more questions. The question you write must complicate the comment’s argument, make the reader of the comment you are questioning think deeper. Stir up some intellectual trouble.
Step 2- Choose one comment which is thoughtful.
Step 3-
First, paraphrase the comment you are responding to: For example: “Mr. Baalbaki thinks that…”
Then, write a question about the chosen comment. The question must be: clear, sincere, useful and be the sort of question which leads to more questions. The question you write must complicate the comment’s argument, make the reader of the comment you are questioning think deeper. Stir up some intellectual trouble.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
2. Presidential Election 2008: Misleading Facts & Vague Opinions Due: Sep. 12th
Candidates use facts selectively and at times misleadingly in print and TV ads. Just before the Iowa caucus, Barack Obama's campaign ran an ad quoting the Washington Post as declaring that Obama's health plan would save families $2,500. The ad asserted that "experts" say his plan is "the best" and "guarantees coverage for all Americans."
FactCheck pointed out that the Post was citing an Obama campaign statement about saving families money and did not analyze it independently. The "experts" were the editorial writers at the Iowa City Press-Citizen. The guarantee of "coverage for all Americans" was asserted in the St. Paul Pioneer Press and, like the ad, omitted mention that while the Clinton and Edwards health plans require coverage for all Americans, the Obama plan allows individuals to buy into coverage if they want to. (www.factcheck.org)
This examples demonstrate, among other things, that a factual statement can be accurate--if cherry-picked--but may come from a tree of sour cherries.
Presidential candidates must answer many questions daily. Usually, and even in debates, they don't have enough time to discuss them in detail--assuming they could if they had the time. One result is a swift recitation of unsupported opinions from "talking points"--that is, a collection of brief statements of views on many issues they know they will be asked about. Because some of these issues are complicated, candidates often make fuzzy utterances.
In developing your own opinion about a candidate's remark, consider its factuality. Several websites offer help. FactCheck Org describes itself as "a nonpartisan, nonprofit 'consumer advocate' for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases." The website is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania
Other, similar efforts include a project of the St. Petersburg Times and the Congressional Quarterly (www.politifact.com) and a Washington Post blog (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/). All three sites are updated regularly.
Consider also the candidates' opinions. How clearly does a candidate state his or her opinion? Is the opinion supported with facts-at least on the candidate's websites, if not in brief public remarks? Does the candidate present facts selectively, omitting those that are inconvenient?
Assignment:
Select a presidential campaign issue of particular interest to you, investigate how, in terms of factual and opinion statements, one candidate discusses this issue, and susenctly post your findings. I suggest you use one of the resources for young voters on my web site. Young Voters (http://teacherweb.com/NY/Cunningham/Frederick/links2.stm)
FactCheck pointed out that the Post was citing an Obama campaign statement about saving families money and did not analyze it independently. The "experts" were the editorial writers at the Iowa City Press-Citizen. The guarantee of "coverage for all Americans" was asserted in the St. Paul Pioneer Press and, like the ad, omitted mention that while the Clinton and Edwards health plans require coverage for all Americans, the Obama plan allows individuals to buy into coverage if they want to. (www.factcheck.org)
This examples demonstrate, among other things, that a factual statement can be accurate--if cherry-picked--but may come from a tree of sour cherries.
Presidential candidates must answer many questions daily. Usually, and even in debates, they don't have enough time to discuss them in detail--assuming they could if they had the time. One result is a swift recitation of unsupported opinions from "talking points"--that is, a collection of brief statements of views on many issues they know they will be asked about. Because some of these issues are complicated, candidates often make fuzzy utterances.
In developing your own opinion about a candidate's remark, consider its factuality. Several websites offer help. FactCheck Org describes itself as "a nonpartisan, nonprofit 'consumer advocate' for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases." The website is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania
Other, similar efforts include a project of the St. Petersburg Times and the Congressional Quarterly (www.politifact.com) and a Washington Post blog (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/). All three sites are updated regularly.
Consider also the candidates' opinions. How clearly does a candidate state his or her opinion? Is the opinion supported with facts-at least on the candidate's websites, if not in brief public remarks? Does the candidate present facts selectively, omitting those that are inconvenient?
Assignment:
Select a presidential campaign issue of particular interest to you, investigate how, in terms of factual and opinion statements, one candidate discusses this issue, and susenctly post your findings. I suggest you use one of the resources for young voters on my web site. Young Voters (http://teacherweb.com/NY/Cunningham/Frederick/links2.stm)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)