review: http://www.newsweek.com/id/168849
review: http://www.newsweek.com/id/169159
nonfiction: http://www.newsweek.com/id/169158
nonfiction: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1859354,00.html
fact: http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/sex/truth-about-dating
fact: http://www.cosmopolitan.com/style/tips/beauty_qa_hair
advertisement: http://www.seventeen.com/magazine/
advertisement: http://www.cosmopolitan.com/
fiction: http://www.newyorker.com/fiction/features/2008/11/17/081117fi_fiction_lethem
fiction: http://www.newyorker.com/fiction/features/2008/11/10/081110fi_fiction_tower
editorial: http://www.newsweek.com/id/168395
editorial: http://www.newsweek.com/id/168954
Lisa Wikner, Greg Moppert, Amelia Kernan
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
In the news
For months, General Motors had been telling everyone who would listen that bankruptcy was not an option. It had a $30 billion cash pile and plans to restructure the company as the economy rebounded and 2007 U.S. auto sales topped 16 million units.
Then came October. Sales plummeted an astounding 45% over the same period last year, a result of a slowing economy and a dearth of financing for would-be car buyers. Total U.S. car and light-truck sales this year could come in at 13.5 million, 2.6 million fewer than last year. "That's in no body's business plan," says Kimberly Rodriguez, an automotive specialist with Grant Thornton. "The best planning in the world cannot survive that fluctuation." It's now clear that GM can't survive as an ongoing entity without massive federal assistance. The company is burning through more than $2 billion each month. It has $16 billion left. As if they were aboard a dirigible losing altitude, GM's bosses have been frantically throwing all manner of stuff overboard — retiree health-care benefits, people, assets, new car design — to conserve $5 billion. That will get it through the year.
But 2009 is the year of reckoning for GM and the rest of the domestic auto industry, if not the economy as a whole. The GM crisis is raising once again the issue of how far the government should go in rescuing banks, insurance companies, mortgage holders, credit-card issuers and now car makers. GM has no doubts about it. "Immediate federal funding is essential in order for the U.S. automotive industry to weather this downturn," GM president Fritz Henderson admitted to investors during a conference call in which GM announced a third-quarter loss of $2.5 billion.
No one is more aware of that need than Barack Obama, who carried Michigan by a huge margin. The President-elect is committed to helping the Detroit Three, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leading a rescue party that plans to get a bailout bill in front of President Bush before Thanksgiving. So far, the President has offered only to speed through Congress an already approved $25 billion loan to help Detroit create new fuel-efficient models. But GM needs an additional $10 billion simply to pay its bills next year and $15 billion more to close plants, compensate redundant workers and dump some of its lesser-performing brands.
The issue boils down to a historic proposition: Is what's good for GM still good for the country?
"If GM were to go into a free-fall bankruptcy and didn't pay its trade debts, then the entire domestic auto industry shuts down," says Rodriguez. The system — the domestic auto plants and their interconnected group of suppliers — is far bigger than GM. It includes 54 North American manufacturing plants and at least 4,000 so-called Tier 1 suppliers — firms that feed parts and subassemblies directly to those plants. That includes mom-and-pop outfits but also a dozen or so large companies such as Lear, Johnson Controls and GM's former captive Delphi. Beyond those are thousands of the suppliers' suppliers.
Although the Detroit Three directly employed about 240,000 people last year, according to the industry-allied Center for Automotive Research (CAR) in Ann Arbor, Mich., the multiplier effect is large, which is typical in manufacturing. Throw in the parts makers and other suppliers, and you have an additional 974,000 jobs. Together, says CAR, these 1.2 million workers spend enough to keep 1.7 million more people employed. That gets you to 2.9 million jobs tied to the Detroit Three, and even if you discount the figures because of CAR's allegiance, it's a big number. Shut down Detroit, and the national unemployment rate heads toward 10% in a hurry.
Even if just one of the Detroit Three — and GM is the most likely, as Ford is in better shape and Chrysler is much smaller — spiraled into a free-fall bankruptcy, the systemic effects, at least initially, would be huge. The whole industry would not be able to build cars in the U.S., because of the lack of parts. "Unlike the airlines or steel, when you look at the automobile industry and the fact that the whole supplier base is connected — to Ford, Chrysler, Toyota — it will have a ripple effect on the entire industry," says Nicole Y. Lamb-Hale, a bankruptcy expert at the Detroit office of Foley & Lardner, a law firm that represents some GM suppliers.
Question.
Should the government save GM?
Do you think they should focus more on saving the other companies and let GM down?
Do you think that if GM fails all the others will as well?
Then came October. Sales plummeted an astounding 45% over the same period last year, a result of a slowing economy and a dearth of financing for would-be car buyers. Total U.S. car and light-truck sales this year could come in at 13.5 million, 2.6 million fewer than last year. "That's in no body's business plan," says Kimberly Rodriguez, an automotive specialist with Grant Thornton. "The best planning in the world cannot survive that fluctuation." It's now clear that GM can't survive as an ongoing entity without massive federal assistance. The company is burning through more than $2 billion each month. It has $16 billion left. As if they were aboard a dirigible losing altitude, GM's bosses have been frantically throwing all manner of stuff overboard — retiree health-care benefits, people, assets, new car design — to conserve $5 billion. That will get it through the year.
But 2009 is the year of reckoning for GM and the rest of the domestic auto industry, if not the economy as a whole. The GM crisis is raising once again the issue of how far the government should go in rescuing banks, insurance companies, mortgage holders, credit-card issuers and now car makers. GM has no doubts about it. "Immediate federal funding is essential in order for the U.S. automotive industry to weather this downturn," GM president Fritz Henderson admitted to investors during a conference call in which GM announced a third-quarter loss of $2.5 billion.
No one is more aware of that need than Barack Obama, who carried Michigan by a huge margin. The President-elect is committed to helping the Detroit Three, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leading a rescue party that plans to get a bailout bill in front of President Bush before Thanksgiving. So far, the President has offered only to speed through Congress an already approved $25 billion loan to help Detroit create new fuel-efficient models. But GM needs an additional $10 billion simply to pay its bills next year and $15 billion more to close plants, compensate redundant workers and dump some of its lesser-performing brands.
The issue boils down to a historic proposition: Is what's good for GM still good for the country?
"If GM were to go into a free-fall bankruptcy and didn't pay its trade debts, then the entire domestic auto industry shuts down," says Rodriguez. The system — the domestic auto plants and their interconnected group of suppliers — is far bigger than GM. It includes 54 North American manufacturing plants and at least 4,000 so-called Tier 1 suppliers — firms that feed parts and subassemblies directly to those plants. That includes mom-and-pop outfits but also a dozen or so large companies such as Lear, Johnson Controls and GM's former captive Delphi. Beyond those are thousands of the suppliers' suppliers.
Although the Detroit Three directly employed about 240,000 people last year, according to the industry-allied Center for Automotive Research (CAR) in Ann Arbor, Mich., the multiplier effect is large, which is typical in manufacturing. Throw in the parts makers and other suppliers, and you have an additional 974,000 jobs. Together, says CAR, these 1.2 million workers spend enough to keep 1.7 million more people employed. That gets you to 2.9 million jobs tied to the Detroit Three, and even if you discount the figures because of CAR's allegiance, it's a big number. Shut down Detroit, and the national unemployment rate heads toward 10% in a hurry.
Even if just one of the Detroit Three — and GM is the most likely, as Ford is in better shape and Chrysler is much smaller — spiraled into a free-fall bankruptcy, the systemic effects, at least initially, would be huge. The whole industry would not be able to build cars in the U.S., because of the lack of parts. "Unlike the airlines or steel, when you look at the automobile industry and the fact that the whole supplier base is connected — to Ford, Chrysler, Toyota — it will have a ripple effect on the entire industry," says Nicole Y. Lamb-Hale, a bankruptcy expert at the Detroit office of Foley & Lardner, a law firm that represents some GM suppliers.
Question.
Should the government save GM?
Do you think they should focus more on saving the other companies and let GM down?
Do you think that if GM fails all the others will as well?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
job loss
a way to save jobs is to boost the economy people are loosing jobs because there is no need for certain ones, this is affecting everybody. there is a strain on the economy, and that is decreasing the jobs. i dont know what can really be done we might have to just wait it out.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
OBAMA!
Obama represents change, and people have seen what happened with bush and want to try something new. McCain had all the same ideas that bush had and so it would have been just like electing bush for another term they were very similar in many ways. Obama is going to change things. It may take a while for the ball to get rolling but he will accomplish great things. Young voters are ready to see things go positivley and they have seen from a netural seat for a while what happened with bush. and they knew what they wanted. GO OBAMA!
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Journal # 8 & 9
Katie Couric is draging CBS down
Katie Couric is draging CBS down because she needs to be able to spread her wings.
Katie Couric is draging CBS down because she can do better.
Taxes being taken from our back pockets.
Katie Couric is draging CBS down because she needs to be able to spread her wings.
Katie Couric is draging CBS down because she can do better.
This image is showing the man taking money out of his bank ATM, while the other AMT is taking money out of his back pocket. The AMT stands for Alternative Minimum Tax. So basically he thinks he is getting money out but really it is being taken from him trhough all of his taxes.
Taxes being taken from our back pockets.Taxes are being taken from our backpockets because they have been raised.
The taxes come straight out of our own pockets.
Active Reading Questions Gould
1) " Transitions are found in the fossil records. Preserved transitions are not common, and shouldn't be. but not because of our understanding of evolution."
A) "We do not know how the Creator created, what processes He used, for He used processes which are not now operating anywhere in the natural universe."
B) "When we recognize the etymology of September, October, November, and December (seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth, from the Latin), we know that two additional items (January and February) must have been added to an original calender of ten months."
2) He cites interferences as evidence in paragraph 16, and 17
3)It sets the scene so we know what beliefs he will be talking about. so the reader wouldn't expect to have a recent theory in his essay.
A) "We do not know how the Creator created, what processes He used, for He used processes which are not now operating anywhere in the natural universe."
B) "When we recognize the etymology of September, October, November, and December (seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth, from the Latin), we know that two additional items (January and February) must have been added to an original calender of ten months."
2) He cites interferences as evidence in paragraph 16, and 17
3)It sets the scene so we know what beliefs he will be talking about. so the reader wouldn't expect to have a recent theory in his essay.
Active Reading Questions Lightman
1)Yes it gave a good preview, it was about how we know, or could not know for our selves weather or not the earth is round or flat. The intro gives us the basic idea for the essay, and the conclusion gives us a sum up of the whole thing.
2)You really realize he is a scientist when he describes how it would feel to discover something for your self. I think that an artist or a social worker would probably not look that deeply into a subject like weather or not the earth is round or flat. That is not their line of work therefore they would pay less attention to it.
3)He uses a playful tone when he is saying how he didnt quite get to see what he was looking for because it was hazy outside. He says "At the very least, I thought, you would have a pleasent vacation." He uses more of a serious tone when he is talking of acnietn studies that show why those scientists think the earth is round or flat. The change in tones keeps the readers intrest up. If it was a mono tone then the reader might just feel like they are reading a boring biography.
2)You really realize he is a scientist when he describes how it would feel to discover something for your self. I think that an artist or a social worker would probably not look that deeply into a subject like weather or not the earth is round or flat. That is not their line of work therefore they would pay less attention to it.
3)He uses a playful tone when he is saying how he didnt quite get to see what he was looking for because it was hazy outside. He says "At the very least, I thought, you would have a pleasent vacation." He uses more of a serious tone when he is talking of acnietn studies that show why those scientists think the earth is round or flat. The change in tones keeps the readers intrest up. If it was a mono tone then the reader might just feel like they are reading a boring biography.
Active Reading Questions
1) Usually when I revise an essay or any of my writing, I read from the end to the beginging. I start at the beginging of the last sentence read it through, then contiune on up the page.
2)Rereading the essay aloud I dont really hear a difference, or catch any mistakes. I think when people revise essays they read them the way they want them to sound, or how they think they wrote them.
3) Reading the quote used after the author that Murry talks about, makes the advice the other author is giving seem more real. It does not just come off as steps and rules you read. It makes them become more alive.
2)Rereading the essay aloud I dont really hear a difference, or catch any mistakes. I think when people revise essays they read them the way they want them to sound, or how they think they wrote them.
3) Reading the quote used after the author that Murry talks about, makes the advice the other author is giving seem more real. It does not just come off as steps and rules you read. It makes them become more alive.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Youth Vote
I think that what the children are picking is information from their parents. When they see the news they might sorta understand it but it is the conversation after the news segment that will shape what the child thinks. I do not think that children have any special talent at picking a presidential candidate, they are so young and dont even know most of what is going on in the election. It can't hurt to let them vote and feel like they are in power, and have a voice, and it will help for when it really comes time to vote. maybe having these younger kids vote will make teens want to vote more when the time comes. Or atleast these children will grow up and want to vote when they are eighteen.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Orwell Journal 7
In this essay, Orwell suggests that the English language is on the decline because the people who use English are misusing the language. What sort of things does he mention as proof that the English language is in trouble?
The writer might have meaning but they cant express it or they are thinking of one topic and switch to another. He says that our thoughts are foolish therefore our thoughts with writing are foolish. He says that two expamles of bad writing are that imagery has gotten stale, and lack of precision.
Orwell wrote this essay almost 60 years ago. Do you think the English language is in a better or worse condition than when Orwell wrote his essay? I think it is worse, children are learning poor English and it will most likely carry over into their writing, and that will lead to bad writing when they are older. It can be fixed but it would take a while. Can you think of modern examples of how people misuse language? Like if someone is speaking about their broken phone. I have heard college students say “ My phone is broke.” This gets to me I always feel the need to correct them.
What do you think of Orwell’s list of rules to improve your writing? It seems like helpful advice but it just goes against everything we have been taught since we were little and learned to write.
Orwell wrote the following in the provided excerpt:
Probably it is better to put off using words as long as possible and get one's meaning as clear as one can through pictures and sensations. Afterward one can choose -- not simply accept -- the phrases that will best cover the meaning, and then switch round and decide what impressions one's words are likely to make on another person.
What do you think he means when he suggests that one should focus on “pictures and sensations” before one sits down to put words on the page? Have you ever done this? Does it help you write better? One should know what they want to write about and have an idea in their head so they are not jumping all over the place in the writing. Yes I have and it does help a lot.
The writer might have meaning but they cant express it or they are thinking of one topic and switch to another. He says that our thoughts are foolish therefore our thoughts with writing are foolish. He says that two expamles of bad writing are that imagery has gotten stale, and lack of precision.
Orwell wrote this essay almost 60 years ago. Do you think the English language is in a better or worse condition than when Orwell wrote his essay? I think it is worse, children are learning poor English and it will most likely carry over into their writing, and that will lead to bad writing when they are older. It can be fixed but it would take a while. Can you think of modern examples of how people misuse language? Like if someone is speaking about their broken phone. I have heard college students say “ My phone is broke.” This gets to me I always feel the need to correct them.
What do you think of Orwell’s list of rules to improve your writing? It seems like helpful advice but it just goes against everything we have been taught since we were little and learned to write.
Orwell wrote the following in the provided excerpt:
Probably it is better to put off using words as long as possible and get one's meaning as clear as one can through pictures and sensations. Afterward one can choose -- not simply accept -- the phrases that will best cover the meaning, and then switch round and decide what impressions one's words are likely to make on another person.
What do you think he means when he suggests that one should focus on “pictures and sensations” before one sits down to put words on the page? Have you ever done this? Does it help you write better? One should know what they want to write about and have an idea in their head so they are not jumping all over the place in the writing. Yes I have and it does help a lot.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
project 2 draft
Uniforms are the step up to higher learning. Yet Students who have a uniform for school usually complain. They don't think that wearing certain clothes will help them in getting better grades. Many see it as a confinement of their expression.
I wore a uniform from pre-K till eighth grade. I did not mind wearing it. Yes I couldn't wear normal clothes. Having a uniform made getting dressed in the mornings so easy I grabbed the clean shirt and shorts and was off to school. Because we wore uniforms, the kids in my class were not caught up with what everyone else was wearing. It made it better for those who didn't have the money to buy what was cool. When i got to high school I had a lot of clothes to buy to keep up with everyone else. There might be rules for a dress code or a uniform, but teenagers make their own rules. You were looked down on if you wore the same shirt more than twice in two weeks. You were looked at like you were crazy if you showed up with the same shirt as someone else. High school would have been better off with a uniform or a strict dress code. Guys would be less distracted, if girls had to wear clothes that covered everything. Girls would be less likely to judge people by what they are wearing.
Some think that a uniform is a bad idea. They feel that the student may be uncomfortable in what they are wearing and will be distracted by their clothes and not learn. People who see a uniform most likely have never had to wear one. They would feel confined, unexpressed. To be judged who you are by what you wear shows that we are a very judgemental society. Many people who have worn a uniform before hated it when they had to wear. Once they had choices of what to wear they wished they had the uniform.
A uniform keeps people from judging, keeps kids more focused, they are more awake because they are not in sweats and a tee shirt. Uniforms should be mandatory for all schools pre-K through high school. This would boost the classes GPA and make it a level learning field for everyone.
I wore a uniform from pre-K till eighth grade. I did not mind wearing it. Yes I couldn't wear normal clothes. Having a uniform made getting dressed in the mornings so easy I grabbed the clean shirt and shorts and was off to school. Because we wore uniforms, the kids in my class were not caught up with what everyone else was wearing. It made it better for those who didn't have the money to buy what was cool. When i got to high school I had a lot of clothes to buy to keep up with everyone else. There might be rules for a dress code or a uniform, but teenagers make their own rules. You were looked down on if you wore the same shirt more than twice in two weeks. You were looked at like you were crazy if you showed up with the same shirt as someone else. High school would have been better off with a uniform or a strict dress code. Guys would be less distracted, if girls had to wear clothes that covered everything. Girls would be less likely to judge people by what they are wearing.
Some think that a uniform is a bad idea. They feel that the student may be uncomfortable in what they are wearing and will be distracted by their clothes and not learn. People who see a uniform most likely have never had to wear one. They would feel confined, unexpressed. To be judged who you are by what you wear shows that we are a very judgemental society. Many people who have worn a uniform before hated it when they had to wear. Once they had choices of what to wear they wished they had the uniform.
A uniform keeps people from judging, keeps kids more focused, they are more awake because they are not in sweats and a tee shirt. Uniforms should be mandatory for all schools pre-K through high school. This would boost the classes GPA and make it a level learning field for everyone.
Monday, October 6, 2008
project 2
Do you think students wearing a uniform will increase learning.
1-yeah
Why?: My school had a very stirct dress code of kakhis and polos. This increased our overall GPA. It effects the kids, because when they are dressed more professionally they are more awake because they are less comfortable and less likely to fall asleep in class.
2-No
Why?: Because usually kids express themselves through their clothes, there fore they will be less happy at school, because they are worried about what they are wearing. and then concentration would be placed upon looks and how the student feels in the uniform not on their studies
3-Yes
Why?: They will be more focused less worried about what to wear like a social barrier will be taken down for the fact that the girls will not be competing to look better then one another if everyone is wearing the same clothes then no attention will be paid to them rather than their studies.
Do you think High schools should have a uniform or just a strict dress code?
1- we basically had a uniform.
2- I guess a strict dress code would be better because atleast then you have some say in what you wear.
3-A strict dress code would do.
1-yeah
Why?: My school had a very stirct dress code of kakhis and polos. This increased our overall GPA. It effects the kids, because when they are dressed more professionally they are more awake because they are less comfortable and less likely to fall asleep in class.
2-No
Why?: Because usually kids express themselves through their clothes, there fore they will be less happy at school, because they are worried about what they are wearing. and then concentration would be placed upon looks and how the student feels in the uniform not on their studies
3-Yes
Why?: They will be more focused less worried about what to wear like a social barrier will be taken down for the fact that the girls will not be competing to look better then one another if everyone is wearing the same clothes then no attention will be paid to them rather than their studies.
Do you think High schools should have a uniform or just a strict dress code?
1- we basically had a uniform.
2- I guess a strict dress code would be better because atleast then you have some say in what you wear.
3-A strict dress code would do.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Tavris
1) What perspectives does Tavris present that are different from those of Richard Cohen? What ideas in her essay are similar to those in his?
Tarvis is defending men saying that womens realtionships are just shallow and dont really mean anything. Cohen is saying how men cant have real friends and how women are correct in their views on friendships. both essays compare men and women's friendships.
2)In your own words, paraphrase both Cohen's and Tavris's definitions of friendship. Then, write your deffinition of friendship, in which you explicitly agree or disagree with the ideas of Cohen and/or Tavris.
Cohen says that friend ship is based on what each person tells one another. and how comfortable they are expressing their emotions with one another. Tavris is defending men saying how they are based on expierience not just talking. she sees womens friendships together more as shallow and sell them out as soon as something cute walks by. I Really agree with the fact that men do not share their feelings, very easily. it takes a bit to get it out of them and i dont think men are really that interested in each other enough to want to drag it out of them. women seem to feel that if somehting is off it must be fixed imeadately. a woman hates to have anything wrong. she will bug a man till he breaks and spills the beans on whats going on. Some women will sell out their best friends for a guy but that is not all women nor will all men keep every thing bottled up. I had to make a choice once between my friend and a guy i picked the guy and me and my friend did not talk for a year and ahalf. but then we reconnected and now all is good and i have both my friend and my boyfriend
3) How does Tavris suggest classifying peple as either "mature" or "immature"? Why does she make this distinction? What other characteristics would you say define someone (male or female) as "mature" or "immature"?
She says that one cannot judge if someone is mature or immature because there might be a different side to the story, it is not fair to judge someone else on if they are mature or not on what you belive to be mature because to someone else you might look just as immature. Maturity is more something that is present when it needs to be it is fun to be immature because look at little children they get to run around and be immature and then boom they are told to grow up and become mature. how that works i am not sure. noone can judge if someone else is immature or not becuase chances are they are not any more mature then the one they judge.
Tarvis is defending men saying that womens realtionships are just shallow and dont really mean anything. Cohen is saying how men cant have real friends and how women are correct in their views on friendships. both essays compare men and women's friendships.
2)In your own words, paraphrase both Cohen's and Tavris's definitions of friendship. Then, write your deffinition of friendship, in which you explicitly agree or disagree with the ideas of Cohen and/or Tavris.
Cohen says that friend ship is based on what each person tells one another. and how comfortable they are expressing their emotions with one another. Tavris is defending men saying how they are based on expierience not just talking. she sees womens friendships together more as shallow and sell them out as soon as something cute walks by. I Really agree with the fact that men do not share their feelings, very easily. it takes a bit to get it out of them and i dont think men are really that interested in each other enough to want to drag it out of them. women seem to feel that if somehting is off it must be fixed imeadately. a woman hates to have anything wrong. she will bug a man till he breaks and spills the beans on whats going on. Some women will sell out their best friends for a guy but that is not all women nor will all men keep every thing bottled up. I had to make a choice once between my friend and a guy i picked the guy and me and my friend did not talk for a year and ahalf. but then we reconnected and now all is good and i have both my friend and my boyfriend
3) How does Tavris suggest classifying peple as either "mature" or "immature"? Why does she make this distinction? What other characteristics would you say define someone (male or female) as "mature" or "immature"?
She says that one cannot judge if someone is mature or immature because there might be a different side to the story, it is not fair to judge someone else on if they are mature or not on what you belive to be mature because to someone else you might look just as immature. Maturity is more something that is present when it needs to be it is fun to be immature because look at little children they get to run around and be immature and then boom they are told to grow up and become mature. how that works i am not sure. noone can judge if someone else is immature or not becuase chances are they are not any more mature then the one they judge.
project one edited
I believe that having a learning difference is a great strength rather than a weakness. My main reason for believing this is because in sixth grade I was diagnosed with attention deficit disorder. When I was in fifth grade math I could not keep up. I was falling behind and I really just did not understand why everyone else could do the math but me. My teacher would tell me to just look at examples and try to figure it out. This frustrated me because it all looked like a foreign language to me. When I got to the sixth grade, I began attending The Hill Center, a special school for children with learning differences. The Hill Center helped me develop skills I needed to succeed. I did not have a 504 to explain to my teachers about my LD. I had to go to my teachers at my other school and explain the help I needed by myself. I became I a very good self advocate. In the ninth grade I had a great science teacher; he was all about helping me even without my 504. This was a relief, because I was worried that the public schools would not help me with my LD. In my junior year I was not as lucky with my teacher in chemistry. He did not believe in learning differences. This made things very hard I would go in for extra help, and he would tell me that I was doing it wrong. Yet he would not explain how to do it any other way. He would just tell me that I was doing it incorrectly this really frustrated me. Being told that I was wrong but not being told how to fix the problem. I kept going to him for extra help every other day; he even told me I was incapable of learning. I would come home really upset at this point my mom knew she needed to get involved. She set up an appointment with my counselor and the teacher. We all sat there and talked about how we could resolve this problem. We came up with a couple solutions. After that nothing changed it was as if we hadn’t had the meeting. I passed the class with a C. I was proud but worried about what colleges would think about me getting a C in chemistry. My senior year was better not as good as ninth and tenth grade. This teacher did not like to give extra help, but the class was easier so I did better. Going through two years with teachers who would not help me, and making me advocate the help I needed really made me a stronger learner. I had to listen to people tell me I could not learn, and discourage me. I knew differently I knew I could do anything I put my mind to. The Hill Center taught me that having a learning difference does not mean that you are dumb or cannot learn, but that you just learn a different way. I am so grateful for having had the opportunity to attend such a wonderful school like The Hill Center. If I had not attended The Hill Center, I would never have learned to become a strong advocate for myself. Having a learning difference is a great strength of mine; I can tell people exactly what I need. This skill has been very beneficial for college. My LD has shown me that I have to take care of myself no one else is going to do it for me, if I need something, I have to get it. I see my LD as a challenge, not a setback. I am a stronger person because of my learning difference.
i know that it doesnt make much sense to be going from a math LD to a LD in science but math and science sorta go hand in hand not sure
i know that it doesnt make much sense to be going from a math LD to a LD in science but math and science sorta go hand in hand not sure
cohen
1) According to Cohen, what are the properties of men's relationships? Why does he think that these properties do not fit a definition of friendship?
He says that men cannot have real friends, he says that they do not express themselves like women do therefore they will never have real friends. they are more buddies, chums, pals, but not people they will ever express any feelings to one another. They do not talk like women do they wont express things that are bothering them. They keep to themselves.
2) What fundamental distinction does Cohen make between men and women? That is, how does he classify men and women? Do you agree with his classification? Why or why not?
Women will straight up tell you how they feel if they are having a bad day or a great day. they will vent till your ears fall off. men on the other hand you have to practically drag what ever is bothering them out. you cannot simply say hey whats wrong no it takes much more. Men/boys have been brought up to believe that it is not right for men to express emotion and or feelings. so they keep to them selves. i agree men are very secretive and women are not.
3) Examine the kind of evidence that Cohen offers in paragraph 5 to support his thesis. Would his argument be stronger if he had talked about, or named, specific men? What are the risks of generalizing about human behavior?
he has a very strong argument. naming specific men he knows just makes it seem that he only knows this of his friends. then again generalizing men all into one makes it hard because some men do express their feelings. Generalization is hard, because no two people are exactly alike and so makeing a general statement just makes it harder to believe because it is more likely that it is not true all the way through.
He says that men cannot have real friends, he says that they do not express themselves like women do therefore they will never have real friends. they are more buddies, chums, pals, but not people they will ever express any feelings to one another. They do not talk like women do they wont express things that are bothering them. They keep to themselves.
2) What fundamental distinction does Cohen make between men and women? That is, how does he classify men and women? Do you agree with his classification? Why or why not?
Women will straight up tell you how they feel if they are having a bad day or a great day. they will vent till your ears fall off. men on the other hand you have to practically drag what ever is bothering them out. you cannot simply say hey whats wrong no it takes much more. Men/boys have been brought up to believe that it is not right for men to express emotion and or feelings. so they keep to them selves. i agree men are very secretive and women are not.
3) Examine the kind of evidence that Cohen offers in paragraph 5 to support his thesis. Would his argument be stronger if he had talked about, or named, specific men? What are the risks of generalizing about human behavior?
he has a very strong argument. naming specific men he knows just makes it seem that he only knows this of his friends. then again generalizing men all into one makes it hard because some men do express their feelings. Generalization is hard, because no two people are exactly alike and so makeing a general statement just makes it harder to believe because it is more likely that it is not true all the way through.
Trooper
I am not sure if it was a racil act or not but I think the trooper might have gotten caught up in the moment and hit the man on purpose if the suspect had pissed off the trooper the trooper might have been angry and wanted revenge. I really do believe that the trooper should get the ten years and the fine. many times cops, sheriffs and state troopers get let off on things when they "screw up" but because they were "doing their job" they get off wich is complete b.s. they should not be treated any different. if they commit a crime they should not be protected by a badge. there have been many things like this but atleast this trooper gets locked up. if the president killed someone would he be punnished. just because they have a badge does not make it acceptable to commit a crime
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Splenda
1)How do you feel about having all this publicity about splenda?, how does this affect you?
I don't really use splenda therefore it does not affect me that much i guess if i began to use it i would be more conscious of its effects.
2)How many times a day do you think people or even yourself uses splenda as a sweetener?
Well at least 2 in their morning coffee, and if they are cooking and think it is better than regular sugar then probably at least 5 times a day, maybe.
3) Do you think moderation is the key? do you think this may help the "good bacteria"?
if it was in your hands the solution, what would you do?
For weight gain yes moderation is the key. i do not really understand the "good bacteria" so i am not sure what i would do if it was in my hands.
I don't really use splenda therefore it does not affect me that much i guess if i began to use it i would be more conscious of its effects.
2)How many times a day do you think people or even yourself uses splenda as a sweetener?
Well at least 2 in their morning coffee, and if they are cooking and think it is better than regular sugar then probably at least 5 times a day, maybe.
3) Do you think moderation is the key? do you think this may help the "good bacteria"?
if it was in your hands the solution, what would you do?
For weight gain yes moderation is the key. i do not really understand the "good bacteria" so i am not sure what i would do if it was in my hands.
active reading questions
1. Examine the details Sanders gives about building a wall to divide a room. Can you clearly visualize what Sanders is doing at each step? Is each concept clearly defined? Why, at the end of the essay, does Sanders feel the need to describe so clearly each step in the process?
You have to use the right tools, to do a good job, you have to measure correctly and get all the cuts right. I did not really understand what he did at each step in the process. He probably was rembering his father, he wanted to rember exactly how his dad did things so he doesnt forget.
2. How does Sanders use chronological order in this essay? What objects, images, or ideas connect the different periods of time that he describes?
Sanders really jumps back and forth in the times he is telling about. He starts with the day his father died, and then goes to a time with his father and grandfather telling him about the tools. I think the hammer connects the different times, because it is what he feels connected to when he doesnt have his father.
3. What is a "dawn stone"? Why does Sanders describe it in this essay, and what does it represent to him?
A "dawn stone" is an unworked stones, that served as the hammers.
It represents his ancestors, and makes him realize that he is still connected with them, because it is a "great leap in time, but no great distance in design or imagination."
You have to use the right tools, to do a good job, you have to measure correctly and get all the cuts right. I did not really understand what he did at each step in the process. He probably was rembering his father, he wanted to rember exactly how his dad did things so he doesnt forget.
2. How does Sanders use chronological order in this essay? What objects, images, or ideas connect the different periods of time that he describes?
Sanders really jumps back and forth in the times he is telling about. He starts with the day his father died, and then goes to a time with his father and grandfather telling him about the tools. I think the hammer connects the different times, because it is what he feels connected to when he doesnt have his father.
3. What is a "dawn stone"? Why does Sanders describe it in this essay, and what does it represent to him?
A "dawn stone" is an unworked stones, that served as the hammers.
It represents his ancestors, and makes him realize that he is still connected with them, because it is a "great leap in time, but no great distance in design or imagination."
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Test or not
If the cancer runs in the children's genes then the parents should have their children tested. But both need to be able to deal with the end results no matter what they are. I think it would freak a kid out to know they might have cancer and not know but it could also hurt them to find out that they do have it at such a young age. Teenagers should decide for them selves when to be tested, it is good that finding out early would help the child cut back on drinking and smoking which can increase the negative effects.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
