What Is Power?

Evidence from your blog entries, 300-500 words.

I think means that power is something that a person or a group of people can do to change things. But not only change things, but also the person or group of people can control other people (which is more a dictator, but a dictator has the power to control other people). How the person or group of people choose to use their powers, determines if it’ good or bad thing that they have powers. If the power falls into the wrong hands it could really become a disaster For example a dictator has power and uses the power for evil things, like forced labor. But a president has power to, and could decide what to do if there is a war, which is a good power.

In the great powers game, the bigger countries had the bigger advantage, since already from the start they had more money to spend. Even though not all big countries have a lot of power, they have bigger chances of being heard than smaller countries. I think it has to do with that the population is probably also bigger, and that means more people, more “minds” to form more ideas. Additionally more people join the army making the defense better. A good defense also means power, because it can defeat others, and take control, achieving power in that way. Another reason is more unemployed people are getting jobs, making the economy grow. A big economy can do a lot of good, and gives a lot of power to a country, because it makes the country wealthier. A rich country also gives power, because they can buy more weapons, employers, electricity, industries and a lot of things that could make a country better.

For my industrial revolution project I did a piece about women’s rights and that also shows that before men had all the power. Before women had to stay at home and take care of the home, while the men were out working to earn the money. Women weren’t allowed to vote, they weren’t allowed to choose who ruled in the county that they lived in too. This show’s that the men made all the decisions, because they worked and got an education. After allot of demonstrations, it wasn’t until 1920, that women in America were allowed to vote. All these things that happened before are still happening today in some countries. Which shows inequality, and that men have more power.

In Animal Farm, education equals power and that was because the other animals didn’t understand what was happening, but were relying on the educated to tell them what was happening. The educated animals took advantage of this, and started to make the other uneducated animals do all the labor. Education is also a key to power. With the information you can understand what is happening, or what needs to be done. It is also a way to become a president, who like I said before, has a lot of power.

Image:

http://www.clker.com/cliparts/d/e/6/2/11954302831052874704molumen_multicolor_power_buttons_1.svg.med.png
http://www.ncss.com/images/index.2.jpg

Debate on AT

Opening remark- Affirmative
Ladies and gentlemen did you know that in one year millions of animals die from animal testing’s. Out of those millions, 65,000 are dogs. All these animals die in distress, and not only distress but they also die suffering. Most of what the animals experience is torture; this leads to the animals suffering until they die. Animal testing’s on animals should clearly be banned. First of all, it’s unethical. Unethical means that people are doing things that most people think is wrong to do, that a normal moral person would think wrong to do. Secondly it’s teaching school kids that it’s ok to test on animals if it enhances education, but hurting an innocent animal is wrong. Education should foster compassion and respect for life. It has also been noted that children who treat animals with violence could unconsciously start to be violent towards humans too. Thirdly, enough testing’s have been done in the past that we can use that information for future references. Also instead of animal testing’s helping humans, more and more professionals think that animal testing might be delaying the development, because it could provide inaccurate and mistaken information. And don’t forget that human beings and animals are physically different, and could react differently towards medicine since they have different metabolisms. In some countries many scientist and doctors are starting to act against animal testing. So is it really worth making the innocent animals suffer? Imagine if it was your pet suffering.

http://www.java-animal.org/eng/Summary2.html



Second speaker for affirmative side
(Summarizes argument presented so far for BOTH sides, and tries to explain superior of their own side. Must answer any questions raised but the negative side. Finally, should present the strongest point for the affirmative with appropriate supporting evidence.)

We are on the affirmative side, meaning that we think that animal testing should be banned. So, as we said before animal testing is wrong for many different reasons. When you said….

Might say: It enhances education
It’s wrong to take away a life, its teaching kids that it is ok to kill an animal for the good of education, but it’s not right to hurt an innocent animal just to see what happens. Like I said before that most children who treat animals with violence could unconsciously start to be violent towards humans too.

Might say: It is necessary to human life
Human beings and animals are physically different; they react differently to the drugs because of their metabolism. So a drug that works on humans might not necessarily work on humans. Although the animals may be of the same species, the data obtained by animal testing may differ by 10 times depending on the type of lifestyle, and environment they are in. Also instead of animal testing’s helping humans, more and more professionals think that animal testing might be delaying the development, because it could provide inaccurate and mistaken information. So instead of animal testing really helping humans, it’s causing the process to be longer. Also in the process of saving one human life, you may be killing a hundred animals.

Might say: Humans are superior, they have sentient thoughts
But animals still experience pain and fear, and the animals are suffering from the snide-effects of the drugs. And even though we are superior and can make in depth decisions this does not mean that we have the right to mess with their species. Whoever said that we had the right to start testing it on other species? It’s mean and it’s cruel.

Might say: Killing plants is the same as killing animals and that’s still happening
Let me ask you this. Do the trees suffer? Are the trees experimented on? Trees don’t have a memory and don’t feel pain. Even though they are alive, this does not mean that you can compare trees to animals! Also planting trees is a lot easier than reproducing.

Might say: There is no other alternative
In the past there was no other alternative, but today we have made enough tests and research for future references. And, like I said before, humans and animals react differently to the drugs.

….These are some reasons that I think are reasonable to why animal testing should be banned.



Closing statement- affirmative side
So, as we said before animal testing is wrong for many different reasons. Some of the reasons we pointed out before were: it’s unethical making animals suffer with the side-effects; its teaching school kids that it’s ok to do tests on animals if it enhances education, but we have no right making an animal suffer just to see what happens. Education should foster respect for life. It is necessary for human life, but since animals and humans may experience the drugs differently, it may not necessarily work on humans. Making humans suffer too, since it prolongs the research. And finally it is not the only alternative. Many tests have been done in the past, and with that data we can use it for future references. So we don’t have to keep testing to see if they work on animals. We already know if a drug works or not. So we overall think that animal testing should be banned. Thank you.






Second speaker for Negative side
(Summarizes argument presented so far for BOTH sides, and tries to explain superior of their own side. Must answer any questions raised but the negative side. Finally, should present the strongest point for the affirmative with appropriate supporting evidence.)


We are on negative side, meaning that we think that animal testing should not be banned. So, as we said before animal testing brings positive reactions for many different reasons. When you said….

Might say: The animal may in the long run be extinct
This can’t happen because rodents can breed year-round and usually have up to 50 babies at a time. Also scientists won’t experiment on soon to be extinct animals, and nowadays only the necessary amount of animals should be used. Animal testing has been going on for a long time, and they aren’t extinct yet. Not even close.

Might say: The animal feels pain
But nowadays the pain or distress that the animals experience is minimized. And they won’t remember the pain, so they won’t suffer from remembering how it felt like when it hurt. They only feel what’s happening at the time.

Might say: You’re taking away an innocent life
But rodents life expectancies are about 3-5 years, and the animals are contributing to humans, who can live up to 80-90 years! So even though we are taking away an innocent life, we are saving many more innocent lives in the long run. With the right cure it could end or prevent a lot of diseases and a lot of suffering.

Might say: The animals suffer a lot
Or It’s not necessary for human life
Let me ask you this, would it be better that humans suffer? Without animal testing research on medicine cures could be pro-longed. Patience’s and their families will suffer even more from waiting for the cure. The patience might even die. And if the patience does die, it is making more humans suffer for their loss. When animals die in testing’s, no one suffers from their death except the animals themselves.

Might say: Humans aren’t superior
Yes humans are superior, we have the ability to make in depth decisions, have long term feelings and have sentient thoughts, which is like life long memories. We aren’t dependant on animals, they are dependent on us. Where would the rodents get their food if it weren’t for us? All in all, humans are superior to animals.

Might say: Killing animals isn’t ethical
But if killing animals isn’t ethical then cutting down trees isn’t ethical either. (?)

Might say: Education isn’t a reason
But if we are the only species with sentient thoughts, and want to save lives, then why not move forward in life?

Might say: Animal life = Human life
Rodents have a shorter and less productive life; they can live up to 3-5 years, can breed all year long and produce up to 50 babies at a time. Compared to a human life who can live up to 80-90 years, has the opportunity to do something productive, can’t reproduce all the time, and usually have only one baby at a time. Why shouldn’t we test on animals? An animal life does not equal a human life, it’s not even close.

Might say: There are other alternative
New diseases are developing all the time, and even though we have data from the past, we still have to see if the new medicines work, or if combining two different medicines will work. If we don’t test on animals, the research will be prolonged, many people will die, and innocent people will suffer just because they got unlucky and got a disease. There is no other alternative.

Closing statement- Negative side
So, as we said before animal testing should not be banned for many different reasons. Some of the reasons we pointed out before were: it’s necessary for human life, less people die, and less people have to suffer. It enhances education; it tells us that these chemicals could save thousands of lives. The animals won’t remember the pain, it will just suffer in the moment, while humans remember the pain, and also they suffer when someone close to them dies. Also the pain and distress has been minimized. If humans have the chance to save millions of lives in the future, but would have to kill a few animals in the process, why shouldn’t we? Wouldn’t you do it for the better? Thanks.

Population Project Work Plan for the Week

I was sick for most of the week, so I couldn't do a Population Project Work Plan for the Week.

Analysing Globalization Picture

What are the main visual elements?
In the picture there is a man sting in an armchair holding a newspaper and wearing suit with a tie, and without the blazer. Next to the man there is a dog looking a bit shocked lying next to the man. Then a next to the man’s other side a little further away is a little girl looking mad. The man is saying “No you may NOT outsource your homework to India.” The man is probably the girl’s dad.

What issue is this cartoon about?
The issue is that the girl wants to outsource her homework to India, meaning that she wants get information from India. Her dad is saying no, meaning that she has to do it herself.

What is the cartoonist’s opinion on this issue?
I think that the cartoonist doesn’t like outsourcing, or globalization.

What evidence in the cartoon supports your opinion on how the cartoonist feels?
Because in the picture, he is saying no to outsourcing.

How does this cartoon relate to our study of globalization?
Globalization is making the world “flat”, and outsourcing is one of the ten flattners why the world is flat.

What other techniques could the cartoonist have used to make this cartoon more persuasive?
Maybe to show that the cartoonist really didn’t like outsourcing and globalization, the father could look a bit mad or annoyed while saying “No you may NOT outsource your homework to India”.


Image from: www.sandiegohomeblog.com

Population Project Recap

The three most valuable things I learned from UBD (or Population Project) was:

• How to write a research paper. Even though we learned with the Africa research paper, I think that this time I focused more on it and worked harder on it this time, I learned more. This is a very good skill to have in the future, in high school and college. Now if I get an essay in high school I would know how to approach it, and how to write it.
  

• I learned that it's a symbiotic relationship between educational levels and economic growth. This is useful to know for future references. And could be a topic I might study in the future, which is useful to know.

• Thirdly I learned how to take data and write about it. Before I would just look at the data and wouldn't be sure what to write. But now, I learned how to look at data and apply it to a text. This is also good to know how to do for future essays in high school and college.
  

Sameness & Equality

Precise use of language is an important theme in The Giver. Why does Lois Lowry purposefully use the word ‘sameness’ instead of ‘equality’? Explain what the difference is in the meaning of the words. Then using the Giver and Animal Farm cite examples of how we have seen each word used. Which author uses language more precisely?

The difference between sameness and equality is that sameness is when everyone gets the same things and they do the same things. At dictionary.com it says “the state or quality of being the same; identity; uniformity.” Equality on the other hand is when everyone is treated the same way. According to dictionary.com equality is used when talking about quantity, rank or ability.

In “The Giver” everyone had the same things, and everyone did the almost then same things everyday. It was a pattern without real feelings, since they could feel some small feelings. But nothing big and complicated like love or pain. Equality on the other hand is when everyone is treated the same, but they might not do the same things everyday or the same things as everyone else.

The giver feedback

The Giver in many ways is a “coming of age” story, in which we witness Jonas’ growing up. To begin our discussion of The Giver please address the following three questions in your blog using “good” paragraphs.

1. When does one become an adult?
2. What does it mean to be an adult?
3. At what age are people no longer useful to society?

Becoming an adult is a very big step. When becoming an adult you have many responsibility and independence. If you are mature enough to take responsibility for your actions, and be independent and not rely on anyone else all the time. To be an adult means to support yourself and be able to make the right decisions for the future and yourself. You should be responsible enough to take care of yourself, and if you wish to start a family, you should be able to take care of them too.

I think that everyone is useful all the time in the society. The old people can still do something useful in the society in the giver. And the young kids are the future generation who will one day take care of the world. But I don't think anyone is useless to society. They can still help in their way. Wether it is mantaly helping (like thinkig of the ideas of the future) or physically helping (like doing the actual building and stuff). I mean some old people are still very sharp but they are so old. They can still help with their ideas for a better future.

Blogs and parents

Please analyze the above cartoon and post your ideas to your BLOG. As part of your analysis please address the following questions:

1. What are the main visual elements?
2. What issue is this cartoon about?
3. What is the cartoonist’s opinion on this issue?
4. What evidence in the cartoon supports your opinion on how the cartoonist feels?
5. Why is this cartoon ironic?
6. What other techniques could the cartoonist have used to make this cartoon more persuasive?

There is a family eating dinner in their kitchen. The family consists of a mum, a dad and a little kid. They all look unhappy. The kid has a football head, while the parents have long heads (could the kid be adopted?)

I think that the issue is that the parents don’t care. I mean, if the kid tells them, they could choose not to listen. But if they have to read it, it would be really hard to pretend to read it, and then they have to give feedback on it. Or, that parents are getting very lazy nowadays. And they can’t be bothered to read their kid’s own work.

I think that the cartoonist thinks that parents have become lazier and more careless. And that they don’t really want to listen to their kid’s day. This is because they all look sad and bored. And also, the text under the picture is “Well, yes, we could read your blog…or you could just tell us about it” saying that the parents can’t be bothered to read the blog.

I think that the picture is ironic because the kid is asking his parents to read the blog, and the parents can’t be bothered to read it. But in real life, we have our own blogs, and most of us can’t be bothered to tell our parents about our blog.

The parents could be sitting on a sofa and watching T.V. while the kid is standing in the doorway, looking sad. Or the parents could look bigger, to show that they are lazy. Or both!

Evaluation of Kurt Vonnegut's statement

Using examples from “The Euphio Question” and current events evaluate the statement:

“Do you know what a Luddite is? That’s a person who doesn’t like newfangled contraptions. Contraptions like nuclear submarines armed with Poseidon missiles that have H-bombs in their warheads, and like computers that cheat you out of becoming. Bill Gates says, “Wait till you can see what your computer can become.” But it’s you who should be doing the becoming. What you can become is the miracle you were born to work—not the damn fool computer.”

- Kurt Vonnegut

I think that there is some truth in what Vonnegut is saying. But having said so, I don’t agree with him fully. People shouldn’t make things that they can’t control, but I think that they can use things that they can control, and can help people. In “The Euphio Question” the humans couldn’t control the machine, so it was seen as bad. But not everything is like that. For example vacuum cleaners are built to make life easier. Instead of cleaning with a broom that is very time consuming and can give you back pains, you can use a vacuum cleaner, which is 10 times more affective and quicker to use. Now there are even vacuum cleaners that vacuum by themselves, which you can control! Vonnegut seems to think that everything that is electronic technology is bad, but I don’t think that he really understands the gadgets. Maybe it scares him that he won’t be in control (or humans for that matter) but machines will be some day.

Technology and me

1. What is technology?
2. How do you feel about the amount of and use of technology in schools?
3. What are the 5 most and 5 least important technologies used today?

A lot of technology in the new era has a lot to do with electronics. But technology doesn’t necessarily have to do with only electronics. Technology is like tools that help us develop further into the future.

We do use a lot of technology here at AES. For example, in humanities we have blogs on the computers; there is an elective called Robotics, where the main idea is to use a computer and robots; there is almost a projector in every class room.

5 most important technologies I use:

1. Cell phone

2. Laptop

3. Pencil/ pen

4. Eraser

5. Camera

5 least important technologies (according to me):

1. Plastic surgery

2. Useless robots

3. coffee machine

4. McDonald toys

5. self-vacuum cleaners

End of Quarter 3 Feedback

Go back and review your goals for quarter three in humanities. These can be found in the January Archive of your BLOG in a posting titled,” End of Quarter 2 Feedback”. Evaluate how well you have achieved those goals. Include specific evidence from the quarter to validate your evaluation.In addition to your evaluation please create three specific goals that you have for quarter four in humanities. Remember that a good goal is realistic, measurable and specific. List them at the end of this BLOG entry. Please title this entry: End of Quarter 3 Feedback


My 2nd quarter goals were:Get better at Socratic seminars.Plan my AR schedule better, read faster so I don't feel so stressed by the end of the quarter, and plan more time for reading.Get better at revising! I can never give good advice, and I should read faster, and make better decisions when it comes to revising.
I think that I have kind of met my goals for qtr 3. What I mean with that is:
I have gotten better at Socratic seminars, I do talk more, but I am not as good as I would want to be. Let’s look at it at it at this point of view: Fist I am terrible, and I get C-, C. Then I get better and I am more active in the conversation and get C+, B’s. But then what I want to be is more active in the conversation and have more specific evidence and get B+, A’s.So now I am in the middle step, but would like to progress to the next step.
Secondly, the AR schedule didn’t really work out. I mean, I started on a book pretty early in the qtr. But then, long story short, I decided to take a quiz on “Harry Potter and the deathly hallows”, even though I haven’t read it since the summer, I wanted to take it so I would at least have some points. Because at the rate I was reading my other book, I was sure to skip some pages or something, and not get 100% on the AR quiz. So I took the Harry Potter quiz thinking if I don’t get 100% I will at least have some points which is better than no points at all. But then I got 100% on the quiz (which was 34 points! A+!) So I didn’t have to think about the AR anymore.
Thirdly, I don’t think we have revised that much this qtr, and when we have I still think I don’t give very good advice, but I think that it’s at least better than the advice I gave before.
So to sum it all up, I think I kind of met my goals.
My new goals for this final quater of 8th grade (scary!!) is:
1. Do my best when it comes to UBD, and plan it well.
2. Get better at Socratic Seminars
3. Get even better at revising. And give better advice, and I should read faster, and make even better decisions when it comes to revising.

Feedback on "Holy War"

An oxymoron is two words that don’t belong being used together. Why is the phrase “Holy War” an oxymoron? Why is it that so many conflicts in the world today are based upon religious differences yet all major world religions condemn killing?

I think that the phrase “Holy War” is an oxymoron because a war can’t be holy. It’s a brutal thing that takes many lives. It’s the opposite of holy. And the word holy is something that belongs to religion. And many religions say no to wars. But even thought this is the case there are many religious wars going on in the world right now.
It’s hard to say why so many wars are going on because of religion and yet all major world religions say no to war and killing. It could have something to do with many people twist the words, and tell people that it’s ok to kill if it’s for a good cause. I think many people forget about that killing is condemn, and get so absorbed in showing that their religion is better, that they don’t think the whole thing through.

Animal Farm Feedback

With which character in Animal Farm do you most closely identify? Using examples from the novel (and a proper in text citation) justify your comparison.

I think that I am most like Clover. Because she is a trustworthy person (or horse than), when she confronted Mollie about being patted by a human, she didn’t tell anyone. I think I am a very trustworthy person too, and a lot of people have told me things that I have never told anyone else. (Orwell pg. 30) Also, it said in the book that Boxer and Clover never lost heart when it came to working outside during winter. I often try not to give up and stay positive, even when it is hard to see the positive thing sometimes. (Orwell pg. 49) Also in the book it said that Clover learnt the whole alphabet but couldn’t put words together. This is like me because I am smart and all, but I am not overly smart. (Orwell pg. 21)

Orwell, George. Animal Farm. London: Penguin Books, 1945.

Cold War Simulation De-brief

Please answer the following in two “good” paragraphs using complete sentences in your BLOG. Be sure to use specific evidence from the simulation and the above tables to justify your answer.
1. Which country were you? What strategy did you use to try to win?
2. Who won the game and why? Who won the “real” Cold War?

I was Latin America, Europe and Australia with Chris. Since the countries we had were pretty poor compared to the countries in Africa, Middle East and Asia we decided to sell our countries many at a time and cheap. The USA bought all our countries except for one, which the USSR bought. When we had sold all our countries, and were still losing, we decided to let the USSR buy all our land. They did, but we still lost by 22 points.

In the game USA won, because they nuked the USSR three times in a row in the first round, and the USSR could only defend themselves against one of the nukes. When the USA nuked the USSR it showed that the USA had planned ahead, and chose to buy many nukes from the start. The USSR on the other hand hadn’t planned it to well, or thought that an attack wouldn’t come so soon, since they could only defend themselves once. Then it took the USSR some time to build up their strength again. So that lost them a lot of points.

Even though the US and the USSR sat down and decided to end the war I think that the US won the real cold war. This is because today there are only a few communist countries left. Also the USSR broke up into smaller countries instead of still being one big country. And the US economy was doing a lot better than USSR’s, since USSR’s economic growth rate was almost 0% at the time Gorbachev took over. Soon after that the cold war ended.

Feedback on VC communicator

Describe the general process (from idea to completion) for creating a video using Visual Communicator. What are three design related tips to remember when creating a VC presentation? What were the two best and two worst aspects of the conflict video project?

First you have to come up with the topic you want to make a VC presentation on, which you could choose anything you want from A to Z, from apples to zebras. Then when you know what your topic is, you write the script. After the script is completed, you write the story board. The story board is very helpful, because you write down when you want to show a picture, at what line, and how to show it, like fade in or clip in. Then after you have your script and story board you are ready to start filming. Now for the communicator program, I was sick when my class went through how to do it. But when I was filming, my three advices are : don't speak to quickly, take a deep breath and talk clearly and normally; secondly put the scroll speed at a paste where you are looking up at the camera, and not looking down; and thirdly have a good timing for the transitions, when you want to show your pictures or change to another person.

Two of the worst aspects of the VC project were that 1) my scroll speed was very slow that I read ahead, so I wasn't looking into the camera, I was looking down almost the entire time. And at one point I had to slow down because I had to say one line when a picture appeared, so, I said the line very slowly, then I had to pause for a long time. 2) I forgot to add what kind of war the Vietnam war was, which I might get points of.

Two of the good things about the VC project were 1) that when I came back to school, my partners had done all of their parts, and it was just my part left to do, which was very easy. And 2) we had different backgrounds for all three of us. And the name of our station was called "History conflicts" instead of "CNN" like most people had.

AF movie blog post

Even though the book and the movie have the same basic idea, there are a lot of details that aren’t the same. For instance:

1. Old Major died peacefully in the book; in the movie he was shot.
   
2. The song “Beasts of England” is called “Beasts of the world” in the movie, with different text.
   
3. The animals use more human equipment in the movie than in the book. For example they put a TV in the barn and they used binoculars to see if the humans were coming.
   
4. Old Major was buried in the backyard, not put in a storage cupboard.
   
5. In the book, none of the animals except Benjamin, the donkey, seemed to understand what was happening to Animal Farm. In the movie, however, the only animal that understood what was going on was Jessie the dog.
   
6. The windmill was made out of stone in the book, not wood as in the movie.
   
7. In the book, the pigs never filmed news clips of what they wanted to say to the other animals on the farm while in the movie, they did. If the pigs wanted to say something to the other animals on the farm, Squealer was usually the one to announce it in person.
   
8. Mr. Pilkington didn’t help the pigs with the trade in the book, it was Mr. Whymper.
   
9. The ending of the film was different than the book. At the end of the book, the animals did not escape then return to the farm a few years later after Napoleon had died but just kept on working on the farm
   

All in all, I liked the book more than the movie because the movie wasn’t really that good and the book gives you a better idea of how the Russian revolution went.

Feedback: joining the army

In some countries, joining the military is mandatory, in other countries, optional. For example, in Israel and Singapore both men and women are required to perform two years compulsory military service right after high school. Does your country require military service? If so, how do you feel about this? If not, under what conditions would you ever join the military to defend your country?

Well, in Sweden, it’s not mandatory to join the army. But in Singapore it is mandatory to join the army. I probably won’t join the army in Singapore, if they tell me I have to, I will probably give up my Singapore citizen ship.

Well, anyway, if it wasn’t mandatory, like in Sweden, I would only join the army if there was a huge war, and I knew that if I joined, it would make a difference. Like, if we were under attack, and there was need for more soldiers, other wise we would all die (a little dramatic, I know, but anyway) then I would join. Of course I would still be very scared, but if it helps, you have to do what you have to do!

The King is Dead! Long Live the King!

What happened in room M1 was that Mr Coyle, or King Coyle, as he was called, was a tyrant. He taxed us for almost everything. He taxed us for denim, jewellery, sport shoes and orthodontic work, so braces and retainers. This is very unfair, because you can’t take braces off while denim, jewellery and shoes can be removed. The way Mr. Coyle treated us was almost the same way that the king of England king George III treated the colonists. King George III taxed almost everything, like the Quartering Act and the Townshend Act. He even taxed their tea! The King of England was unjust. The colonists were very determined to gain their own rights. They wanted self-determination. It wasn’t so fun when you didn’t have enough money to pay your taxes, and the only way to get more money was to go to Georgia and work. If you did something wrong, you committed “treason”, which in other words meant detention.

The 43 war feedback

1. I think that it is in El Salvador, because in the book there is a volcano called Atlacatl, and there is one volcano called Aatlacatl located in El Salvador. There are jungles in El Salvador, in the book, there are jungles. El Salvador has a president, in the book there is a president. And Uno is Christian, he went to cathedral on Easter.83% are Chrisitans in El Salvador.

2. I think that the author didn’t want conflict with the country, so she didn’t name a specific country. And it also keeps the mystery alive. Where is it? When was it?


"El Salvador." CIA World Factbook. 28 Jan 2008 .
Moeri, Louise. The Forty-Third War. New York: Library of congress,

The declaration of independace

When it becomes necessary for one person to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. The colonists believed that it’s obvious that all people are equal, with certain rights, among the rights are life, liberty and happiness. Governments get their power from the people. When any part of the government that starts to take away the rights of the people, the people have the right to change or take away the government or to make a new one. While people have the right to change or get rid of the government, that it’s for the right reasons, not just however or whenever. It’s their duties to get rid of the government. The colonies have suffered enough and now it’s necessary for us to alter the former system of government. King George III has damaged colonists, caused injuries, and did a lot of bad thing to the colonists.

King George did a lot of bad things to the colonists. Just naming a few things he did were:

He didn’t allow his Governors to pass laws that would help the colonies.
He judged by himself how long one spent in the office, and how much their payment would be.
He kept armies in America without any of the colonists. Knowing that they were still there.
He had armed soldiers among us. The Quartering Act.
He cut off our trade with the rest of the world.
He forced taxes on us without our saying.

Every time he did these things, we asked him to stop. But he just did more. He is a tyrant! Unfit to rule! Not only did we talk to the king, but also to the other British people, and told them why we came to make the colonies from the start. But they didn’t do anything. Those of us that are gathered here are saying that we are free! So we vow to work together to make this happen.

Snake feedback

The main visual elements are of a snake that is cut into eight bits. Each bit has initials of eight colonizes. Under the snake it says “join, or die”.

I think the issues is saying, either you do what we say, or we kill you.

I think that the cartoonist thought that the message was bad, since the snake is dead. The sneak that has all the initials. And the initials are of the colonies that follow the words below, “join, or die”.

To make it more persuasive, I think that the cartoonist could have made it more colourful so it caches people’s eyes.

Great Powers Game Debrief

1. I was Italy, with KJ. I thought it was fun to build an empire, but you have to think carefully through what to do, and be careful of what you choose, because if you chose wrongly you could end up losing! I think that the bigger countries had a greater advantage, since already from the start they had more money to spend. Our empire did ok, we didn’t do too badly, but we weren’t the best either. I think our empire was pretty small compared to the others.
2. In the long run I think armies and industries are more important to buy because you need the armies for defence and the industries to make money. The other countries had a lot of both, and if there was a war we needed to have a lot of armies, and to buy armies we needed industries. Armies are worth more than navies, and the colonies are good to buy before they run out, because then you have more territory.
3. What we did well in was probably what we bought was pretty balanced. What I would do differently would be to buy more colonies in the beginning before they run out, and get more alliances.
4. I think our alliances were pretty successful, because if we didn’t help each other, we would have lost against GB, America and Japan. I trusted most of them, since we were all against the same enemy. My country didn’t declare war, so of course no one helped or hurt us, but we helped other countries.
5. What I learnt from conflict was that it is important to have allies, but you should choose your allies carefully. At the same time, don’t trust them 100%. One country went up against one of their allies, showing that a treaty means nothing to some people. Also be well prepared with armies; don’t just buy like a lot of industries, and only a few armies, because you need to be prepared for the future! You should buy a balance of both armies and industries.

End of Quarter 2 Feedback

My new goals for this quarter are:

Get better at Socratic seminars.

Plan my AR schedule better, read faster so I don't feel so stressed by the end of the quarter, and plan more time for reading.

Get better at revising! I can never give good advise, and I should read faster, and make better decisions when it comes to revising.

I don't really think that I have meet my goals for qtr 2. My goals were: get better at Socratic seminars, plan my AR schedule better, and get better at revising.

Last time we had a Socratic seminar I did talk more, but I still need to work on it more.

For AR ,I thought that 16-20 points was an A, so after I had taken an AR quiz I had 16 or 18 points, and I thought it was an A, so I didn't take another quiz. When I found out that it wasn't an A, I should have planned it better!

When we revise, I don't think I give very good advise, I need to work on that some more...

So to sum it all up, My goals for qtr 3 are the same as qtr 2, which are:

Get better at Socratic seminars.

Plan my AR schedule better, read faster so I don't feel so stressed by the end of the quarter, and plan more time for reading.

Get better at revising! I can never give good advise, and I should read fasteMy new goals for this quarter are:

Get better at Socratic seminars.

Plan my AR schedule better, read faster so I don't feel so stressed by the end of the quarter, and plan more time for reading.

Get better at revising! I can never give good advise, and I should read faster, and make better decisions when it comes to revising.

End of Quarter 2 Feedback

My new goals for this quarter are:

Get better at Socratic seminars.

Plan my AR schedule better, read faster so I don't feel so stressed by the end of the quarter, and plan more time for reading.

Get better at revising! I can never give good advise, and I should read faster, and make better decisions when it comes to revising.

I don't really think that I have meet my goals for qtr 2. My goals were: get better at Socratic seminars, plan my AR schedule better, and get better at revising.

Last time we had a Socratic seminar I did talk more, but I still need to work on it more.

For AR ,I thought that 16-20 points was an A, so after I had taken an AR quiz I had 16 or 18 points, and I thought it was an A, so I didn't take another quiz. When I found out that it wasn't an A, I should have planned it better!

When we revise, I don't think I give very good advise, I need to work on that some more...

So to sum it all up, My goals for qtr 3 are the same as qtr 2, which are:

Get better at Socratic seminars.

Plan my AR schedule better, read faster so I don't feel so stressed by the end of the quarter, and plan more time for reading.

Get better at revising! I can never give good advise, and I should read fasteMy new goals for this quarter are:

Get better at Socratic seminars.

Plan my AR schedule better, read faster so I don't feel so stressed by the end of the quarter, and plan more time for reading.

Get better at revising! I can never give good advise, and I should read faster, and make better decisions when it comes to revising.