AOD: Negotiation

My mom and I disagree all the time. One time my mom and I didn't agree on how long I should stay out with my friends on weekends. She wanted me to be home before the streetlights go on, but I wanted to stay out later because I don't get to see them often because our schedules are so different. Thats when we tried to negotiate a time when it would be reasonable of the both of us. We came to the conclusion that if finish all my homework then I could be home by 11:30pm. Both of us were happy with the decision.

AOD: Public Judgement & Public Dialogue

At PSEC, we all do our best to get everyone to work together to make a choice on problems we are all willing to help solve, and an bringing up an issues that concern many people in the community. Like with the student lounge. Terry brought up the issue and asked if students wanted to make an effort to solve the problems brought up about it or just eliminate it entirely. The lounge was too loud during classes and it would get real messy at times. Students wanted to keep the lounge so not all, but a few came together to clean it up, maintain the lounge, and created rules to keep people from getting out of hand. An issue was brought up and people came who were willing to help solve the problem, which is a definition of public judgment.

AOD: Active Listening

On my first day of school (kindergarten) my teacher tried to teach everyone active listening. She told us that in order to actively listen we need to do 3 things: stop, look, and listen. We needed to stop what we were doing, so we dont have anything to distract us. Then look at the speaker, and give them our full attention. Last, listen to what they are saying. This was to help us get that she said the first time instead of her having to repeat it over and over again. It was pretty fun actually. It helped me learn in a new way.

AOD: Diversity

In all the schools I've been to there was always lots of diversity. There was never really a dominant race. In elementary there were a lot of kids with different ethnicities, like Black, Mexican, Russian, almost every Asian you can think of, and Caucasian. That made me feel comfortable and I made lots of friends. Totem Middle School had an abundance of diversity as well. Even though there were quite a few more Mexicans than any thing else, there were still a lot of other teens of different races.

Portfolio: Reflective Letter

From elementary all the way through the first two years of high school, I have written informative essays to write, from my lenient grading teachers. When I reached PSEC, Craig told us our first essay was to be argumentative. I felt totally out of my comfort zone, but as I have gone through this quarter I was taught a new form of writing that challenged my skills as a writer. I have gone through a major evolution as a writer. As I am given more assignments from my teachers and get evaluated on what I've done, I gain a better understanding of what should do to better the next one. In doing that I have greatly improved in several areas of writing that I wouldn't have had if I was in my old school.

In general I have progressed in a few areas that have made me a greater writer. When I look back at my first essay I can see that I needed to add more evidence and explain it. I also realize I didn't make much sense in the intro. In my portion of the third done with my wiki group, I also found small revisions I could’ve made that I didn’t see before. These small realizations show I have improved in revising. Another area I have progressed in is organization. While I go over what Craig has commented about my essays I have kept it in mind and know what things go together and what isn't necessary in a certain part of my essay. Even revising the draft for this reflective letter I found things I could put in and take out. The small parts I needed to add were things that go with other parts to make it easier to grasp what I am trying to say.

The first essay assigned to the class was about Bacon's rebellion. We had to choose an area that had an impact on causing the rebellion, whether it was political, economical, or social. I chose political because I found much more information to support it than the others. Then we had to give evidence about whether we were for or against it in an argumentative essay. I didn't do as well as I would've wanted because like I said before, I had never done an essay like this one. Now that I look back at it I could find several things I could revise to make it better. One main thing I needed to change was the introduction. It was all over the place and a few things didn’t belong because they had nothing to do with my thesis. Such as, a part about what rebellion is. It had nothing to do with political issues being factor in the cause for Bacon’s Rebellion.

Areas that still need improvement are obvious to me. I am not confident when writing my final drafts. While I'm writing it I'm not convinced that it is written well or not. Another thing I need to improve on is the proper use of words. I don't think my writing style is up to the standards of my placement in school. To extend on my need of improvements, I also know I have trouble writing enough to meet the minimum. When I did the first essay I wrote way less than the minimum of 5 pages double spaced. Usually I would stay away from going into depth. I would usually scratch the surface and use main details. Definitely need to work on improving my skills on creating introductions and conclusions. I'm not sure what goes into an introduction or conclusion. My question is whether an intro and conclusion written different in an argumentative essay or is it the same in any form of writing?

Another essay I have attached to my portfolio is the last essay I had worked on with my wiki group. This essay was also argumentative. For this particular essay our group was given the state Connecticut. Our state and a few others were for the ratification of the Constitution, whereas the rest were against it. The objective was to create an essay that states our position towards the ratification of the Constitution, and why. While doing that we also had to create an argument within the essay so the opposing side could either disagree or support our position. Our group split up jobs for writing the essay. My part was to write about economic issues in Connecticut that caused the state to move toward ratifying the Constitution. According to my instructor, the only problem with my part was the verb context and I could've broken up the portion about money, added a few more details, and made it another paragraph.

For the Final Exam, I think I did quite well on my final exam . My research before the quiz really helped. Once I found the original quote I read over it several times to make sure I really understood it. Then I tried to out the quote into words I could understand better. I also looked at the online thesauri to get a diversity of words that have the same meaning. I didn't want to go into my final exam sounding repetitive and boring using the same word over multiple times. For having only two hours to work on it I know I made a major improvement than on my first essays. I tried my best and everything pretty much came to me as I was typing it up.

Along with my improvements that need to be done and my general progress I have already made, I do have a few strengths. Even though I stated I don't know how to right my final drafts, I really know how to plan out my essay by creating a pre-write. I setup my essay and where I want everything on my pre- write by putting the topics of each paragraph in the body, and then I add the supporting details under each topic. Researching is also a strength I believe I have. I love looking up information because I find it easy. I have a great strength about writing essays on things I can honestly relate to. Normally I stay away from going into depth, because I'm afraid of not getting the right facts or not being correct. When I can relate to something I know what I am talking about, which creates a comfort for me. Because I know what I am talking about, I feel I can go as deep as I please because I know the facts and the outcomes.

Portfolio: Essay 1

Bacon’s Rebellion & Politics

“Bacon attracted a large following who, like him, wanted to kill or drive out every Indian in Virginia. When Berkeley denied Bacon a commission (the authority to lead soldiers), Bacon took it upon himself to lead his followers in a crusade against the `enemy’.”¹ Bacon went against Berkeley, because he couldn’t get his way. Then he made irrational choices to become a leader which for a short time went his way. I believe political instability, caused by the unfair judgment, greed, and stubbornness of leaders, was a major factor in Bacon’s Rebellion. I don’t agree with Nathaniel Bacon’s decision in creating the rebellion, much less his actions during it.

According to the Great Republic by the Master Historians, edited by Hubert H. Bancroft, “When Charles I was executed, the planters of Virginia declared for his son... They gladly welcomed Charles II to the throne, and accepted with acclimation a royal governor, Sir William Berkeley. It was not long, however, ere they found a reason for a second opinion… The Assembly… was kept permanently in session and the inhabitants became prey of venal office holders… Commercial laws were instituted which bore severely upon the planters.”² The planters who were satisfied with their leaders in the beginning disagreed with their government officials because they were treated unfairly. The political officials decided to target one class with overwhelming laws. Nathaniel Therefore, I believe the planters had every right to not agree with their office holders.

The government also caused dilemmas in the Chesapeake Society. Another source stated “Berkeley continually pleaded for restraint from the colonists…”³ because the Indians in Chesapeake were being murdered. “Some, including Bacon, refused to listen. Nathaniel Bacon disregarded the Governors Direct orders by seizing some friendly Appomattox Indians…”⁴ The article also stated that the “Long Assembly was accused of corruption because of its ruling regarding trade with the Indians. A government commission was established to monitor trading among these specially chosen to make sure the Indian were not receiving any arms of ammunition.”⁵ The Indians were in Chesapeake before the colonist came and basically took over. It makes sense why the government wouldn’t like to give the Indians any guns, because they may use it against them. But, it’s the Assembly’s fault for not making an alliance with them in the beginning. Maybe they would’ve made enemies if the colonists’ government wasn’t so greedy.

Today some people still do rebel against their “authority”, but not as irrational as Nathaniel Bacon of course. One Major rebellion had even changed the freedoms of a certain race. Such as the boycotting, marches, and speeches from African Americans in the early 1900’s to stop racism, so they can be treated as equals. Even teachers rebel against the School Board when they stop teaching and start strikes to prove their points or get their thoughts heard. Another difference between now and then is, there aren’t colonies in America any more. Now there are 50 states that make up a giant country. Our government also tries to listen to their people somewhat. They also have tried to make equal rights for all, instead of targeting the “lowest class”. Everyone is now supposed to be treated as equals, even though some don’t agree.

When the government isn’t politically stable, many will want to disagree because the leaders aren’t taking care of all their people. Not saying all will rebel and take it into their own hands as Nathaniel Bacon did, but you can never be too careful. The government may also become corrupt if they make untrustworthy or ravage actions like the Virginia officers did against the Indians. For all the decisions made by older leaders that failed to prove a point , hopefully upcoming presidents, mayors, governors, and representatives choose to make one that will truly better our country.

₁ the Great Republic by the Master Historians, edited by Hubert H. Bancroft, http://pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1p274.html

₂ Volume 1: The Great Republic by the Master Historians Edited by Charles Morris, Great Republic Publishing Co. 1912 http://books.google.com/books?id=yhYEAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=when+charles+i+was+executed+the+planters+of+virginia+declared+for+his+son&source=web&ots=vvRcx6IMY2&sig=wG8hfoNFOgXleGsOMFwLsRqmHik

_{3 & 4}Colonial National Park James town Historic Briefs on Bacon’s Rebellion, Susan McCulleyJune 1987 Revised by Jen Loux William and Mary Intern November 1995 http://www.nps.gov/archive/colo/Jthanout/BacRebel.html

Portfolio: Essay 3

While under the Articles of Confederation, the state of Connecticut was under unfair law. Because of the size of the state, they suffered under the power given to the larger states. Not only that, but there were economical and political reasoning in their favor as well. It was not only Connecticut who suffered, but other smaller states that were affected by these laws. There are several aspects as to why the Articles needed to be changed. Though there are some who did not want this change to be, consider why this is. People are usually tied to what they are used to and I believe they didn’t want to worry about those who might get trampled under the larger state’s feet while in the process of renewal. In a war torn place that had been under conditions of change, they needed to consider more than traditions and what they were comfortable with. Consider this: that change should be something that is embraced as the time changes. When the states didn’t all agree together as a union, they needed to negotiate together until a solution was found.

After the American's won the American Revolution the issue of forming a constitution for all the states arose. Connecticut viewed themselves differently from the other states. "They did not necessarily believe in a strong national government, or think of themselves as having a great deal in common with people from other states." ¹ These differences molded the Constitution into what is today.

A draft was created to force people to fill the Continental line. The men assigned to the draft fought it, creating their own militia. The militia would elect their own officers and form their own independent group. The militia wouldn't go anywhere to fight until they saw their own state was in danger and needed rescuing. Washington, who was almost president at time, showed the people that this theory was alright to follow because it worked. Allowing every other citizen to believe this plan was keeping them all safely protected. ²

Congress noticed the militia's plan and didn't appreciate that the citizen's were opposing the draft. Congress formed a plan to get the militia to disappear while having the draft upheld. This plan occurred in 1778, where Congress promised seven years half pay after the war to all officers who joined the army, and responded to the draft. Then, in 1780 officers were dropping out of the army. This is when Congress upped the price to half pay for life. ²

Another social issue with ratifying the constitution was the view of slaves. Most people in Connecticut, and the other states, didn't view slaves as whole people. When the constitution was being created this issue was huge because the amount of slaves were considered was counted for taxation and representation. Then on July 12th the idea arose that slaves should be counted as 3/4ths of a person, and it was agreed on. ⁴

Another reason why Connecticut ratified the Constitution was for politics. First off, with Americans recovering from the American Revolutionary War, A lot of Federalists wanted to completely separate themselves from the British, and thus wanting a new form of Government. The Constitution would provide just that. However, the fear that if the Constitution wasn’t ratified brought up the idea of Anarchy1. Anarchy was brought up first by Hobbes, who stated in his document, “Leviathan”, that anarchy was essentially “a war of all against all”³. Of course, this idea was brought up around the mid 1600s, but nevertheless, the idea still reigned within the heads of Americans. The thought that anarchism could still potentially be a problem did not set right with the federalists. However, if the constitution was ratified, that still leads the thought of monarchism for the anti-federalists; another deadly form of government, if that.

None of the Americans wanted another monarchy, but that is what the Anti-federalists thought about the constitution. Connecticut Anti-federalists believed that under the Constitution, the American government would become too powerful, and be disguised to hide its monarchic roots⁴. However, this was not what the constitution is about. Without the constitution, the American government would have been too weak under just the Articles of Confederation. The reasons why America did not fall to monarchy are described by the first three articles of the Constitution; Legislative power, Executive power, and judicial power⁵ Since power is separated into three groups, there is not any one person who can warrant all three powers at once. Because of this, a monarchy could never exist.

The many economical issues in Connecticut helped the community move toward ratifying the Constitution. Connecticut does not have any deep sea harbors. This was believed to be a “general mediocrity of fortune” according to Benjamin Franklin.⁶The only trans-Atlantic port city was New London and Long Island. Preserving the Western Reserve was meant to establish a nation wide free-trade area. In doing this, it would've been declared upon federal regulated communities, uniform posts, and prohibiting export duties.

Money was another part of the economical issues. War debts were hard for the community to pay off, making it harder to build up an economy. There were also heavy import duties to pay to New York. Connecticut’s economy was basically agricultural. 80% of the families depended on agriculture entirely, and the rest, at least partially. “Economic advantages were so obvious that the civil & military as well as the commercial leaders of the state grasped the constitution to their bosom with relief and alacrity.” ⁷

A revised or an entirely new solution needed be found because of the problems that the union faced. Though some who resided in Connecticut as well as other states of the union may have said otherwise, the majority stood to say that a change would be best not only for the state of Connecticut, but for many other states as well in similar conditions that they were in. While many of the states in this nation agreed to ratify the Articles, there were some states that did not agree with what the Federalists had planned. In the end, those who represented the state of Connecticut pleaded that the union not be divided, but come together to solve these issues so that they might live together as a nation in harmony.

Political – Austin Riley

1 Hummel, Jeffery R. "The Constitution as Counter-Revolution: a Tribute to the Anti-Federalists." The Journal of the Libertarian Alliance 5: 1. 27 Nov. 2007 <http://www.la-articles.org.uk/FL-5-4-3.pdf.>

2 Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Oxford, Oxfordshire, England: Oxford University, 1881. Google Books. 28 Nov. 2007 .

3 Allen, Michael. ANTIFEDERALISM AND LIBERTARIANISM. Ellensburg, Washington: Reason Foundation, 1981. Reason Papers No. 7. 27 Nov. 2007
<http://www.mises.org/reasonpapers/pdf/07/rp_7_5.pdf.>

4 US Congress. United States Constitution. Cornell Univ., 1787. 28 Nov. 2007 <http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html>.

Social

5 http://www.connhistory.org/ratif_reading.htm

6 http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution_history.html

7 http://oieahc.wm.edu/wmq/Jul04/irvin.pdf

Collier, Christopher “All Politics are Local: Family, Friends, and Provincial Interests in the Creation of the Constitution”

Portfolio: Final Exam

“I would like to write the historical prison with all the political investments of the body it gathers together in closed architecture. Why? Simply because I am interested in the past? No if one means by that… a history of the past in terms of the present. Yes, if one means… the history of the present.”

-Michel Foucault

To summarize Michel Foucault’s quote, historical confinement including the political devotions come together in a closed development. This does not mean they are interested in writing about the past according to what happening in present time. Michel Foucault was trying to get the message across that not all events occurring today are because past history. Also you can’t always rely on the past to know if something will work right if tried again. Basically, you won’t always learn from all past mistakes. It’s not necessarily because they are ignorant and just want to follow in someone else footsteps, but it be just because they didn’t know about it happening before. Something may have occurred in the middle that wasn’t known to make the whole outcome go wrong.

In the earlier years of the becoming of the USA, the British tried to tax the colonists extra. The colonists didn’t agree because they wanted to be independent. The king didn’t know what was going on in the colonies because he didn’t live there, and they colonist didn’t believe it to be fair. Colonist took radical actions to stop the taxation. When the US declared independence in 1776, they also had to set taxes because of the war that occurred. American’s were in debt from the war and it was hard to build up economies for each state. The Americans were afraid it would end up like the British taxation, but fortunately things didn’t get as out of hand.

In present time, we are still getting taxed, except in some states. Things are going pretty well. There is a war going on so prices have gone up in some areas, such as gas prices. Many people don’t agree but there isn’t any one taking irrational actions against the President or Governors. Nobody went to the president and said “if you go through with this war we will end up in debt and everyone will get their weapons against you!” Our country is still running fine and everyone has tried to go on and live their lives with what have come up.

This influences what I have learned in class because you can’t depend on the past history to tell what is happening in the present. I haven’t tried to compare past issues with one that has been similar, and thought it would turn out exactly the same. Had I taken a different route in class, I wouldn’t have learned as much as I did. I would just get more confused and be one sided. I would have answered Foucault’s questions entirely different. I wouldn’t have agreed to his quote, because my opinion would be that you should rely on the past to make decisions for the present.

Portfolio: Reflective Letter (Draft)

To whom it may concern:

I have gone through a major evolution as a writer. As I am given more assignments from my teachers, and evaluated on what I've done; I gain a better understanding of what should do to better the next one. From the time in elementary all the way through the first two years of high school, I have been given informative essays to write by my lenient grading teachers. When I reached PSEC, Craig told us our first essay was to be argumentative and I was totally out of my comfort zone. As I have gone through this quarter I was taught a new form of writing that challenged me as a writer. In doing that I have greatly improved in several areas of writing that I wouldn't have had if I was in my old school.

In general I have progressed in a few areas that have made me a greater writer. When I look back at my first essay I can see that I needed to add more evidence and explain it. I also realize I didn't make much sense in the intro. These small realizations show i have improved in revising. Another area I have progressed in is organization. While I go over what Craig has commented about my essay I have kept it in mind and know what things go together and what isn't necessary in a certain part of my essay.

The first essay assigned to the class was about Bacon's rebellion. We had to chose an area that had an impact on causing the rebellion, whether it was political, economical, or social. Then we had to give evidence about whether we were for or against it in an argumentative essay. We also had to cite books or whatever we researched to support or decision. I didn't do as well as I would've wanted because like I said before, I had never done an essay like this one. Now that I look back at it I could find several things I could revise to make it better.

The areas I still need improvement in are obvious to me. Like I am not confident when writing my final drafts. While I'm writing it I'm not convinced that it is written well or not. Another thing I need to improve on is the proper use of words. I don't think my writing style is up to the standards of my placement in school. To extend on my need of improvements, I also know I have trouble writing enough. When I did the first essay I wrote way too less than the minimum. Usually I would stay away from going into depth, I would only scratch the surface and use main details. I definitely need to work on improving my skills in creating introductions and conclusions. I'm not sure what goes into an introduction or conclusion. My question is whether an intro and conclusion written different in an argumentative essay or is it the same in any form of writing?

Another essay I have attached to my portfolio is the last essay I had worked on with my wiki group. For this particular essay our group was given the state Connecticut. This essay was also argumentative because our state and a few others were for the ratification of the Constitution, whereas the rest were against it. Our group split up jobs for writing the essay. My part was to write about economic issues in Connecticut that caused the state to move toward ratifying the Constitution. According to my instructor, the only problem with my part was the verb context and I could've broken up the portion about money, added a few more details, and made it another paragraph.

Along with my improvements that need to be done and my general progress I have already made, I do have a few strengths. Even though I stated I don't know how to right my final drafts, I really know how to plan out my essay by creating a pre-write. I setup my essay and where I want everything on my pre- write by putting the topics of each paragraph in the body, then I add the supporting details under each topic. Research is another strength of mine. I love looking up information because I find it easy. I have a great strength about writing essays on things I can honestly relate to. Normally I stay away from going into depth, because I'm afraid of not getting the right facts or not being correct. When I can relate to something I know what I am talking about, which creates a comfort for me. Because I know what I am talking about, I feel I can go as deep as I please becauseI know the facts and the outcomes.