AOD Blog #11 - Public Judgment

Recently, I helped Kara plan for the potluck this Friday. I think Kara had done such a great job in planning this event, by the way. We sent emails to everyone in our cohort that they were invited and plan to bring food if they want. I think everyone liked the idea of the potluck, they signed the sheet on what they would bring. Also, the seniors also liked to be part of the potluck, though we thought it was only for Craig and Ben. But then, we decided that everyone in PSEC should take part of the potluck. Recently, we had problems that mostly everyone who is attending the potluck were bringing more desserts than main dishes. I hope some people would decide to bring some main/side dishes. And I hope all goes well in the potluck tomorrow!!! =D

Portfolio: Reflective Letter

Les Brown said, "Shoot for the moon-even if you miss, you'll land amongst the stars". I can relate to this quote with my progression as a writer. At the start of my first essay, it was difficult for me to transition from high school to college writing. I did well in writing essays in high school since I aced mostly all of them. When I attended Writing 101, I ended up having trouble writing with the standards of college. The more I learned of my weaknesses, I was able to improve and modify my writing. In this portfolio, I included the essays "Bacon's Rebellion and Class," "The Whig versus the Tory," and the final. From my first essay to the final, changing my writing philosophy and my writing process has shown that I improved greatly.

My writing philosophy then was that I follow templates. The templates I learned were for the thesis, outlines, and the “They Say/I Say” (which I learned during the first quarter of Writing 101). For example, a thesis template has to have a statement and lists of reasons why. Also, I learned how to organize information into an outline provided. My writing process involved using outlines, drafting, revising, and editing. Sometimes at the last minute, I skip my writing process and go with the flow by "throwing up" jumbled facts. Writing then was a complete mess.
In collaboration of Writing 101 and History 121, the first essay I wrote was about Bacon’s Rebellion. The shift from high school to college awfully affected this essay that it was easy to identify what weaknesses I need to work on. The essay didn't represent as the "argumentative essay" because it was more of a block of bland information. The thesis was vague and it wasn't arguable. I did well in structuring main points of the argument, but the transitions in between the paragraphs were confusing. I did present supporting evidence, but I wrote too much of it that it became informational and the excessive information didn't focus on much of the arguments. Also, the lack of opposing arguments should have been incorporated into the essay. I made strong relations, but the word choice throws off the whole connection that it made no sense. For example, Bob Marley’s quote “targets the gap between social classes in the Chesapeake colonies especially the lower class.” Marley didn’t target the social classes, he targeted the “Jah people’s” opposition of the Babylon establishment. What I meant to say for that misconception was that his situation was related to the Chesapeake’s. Learning from these weaknesses, I made critical improvements into the following academic papers.

One of the following academic papers presenting in the portfolio is "The Whig versus the Tory." The advantage of writing this paper was that it was with a partner. On this essay, I worked with Naomi. We were able to review each other's parts and made some points on what we can further improve on. For this essay, we wrote about the conflicting views of the loyalists and the patriots. This essay was no “ordinary essay,” this was creatively done into a rap battle. It was my first time writing rap lyrics for a project and I was interested and motivated in doing this project that I was able to break away from the templates like ‘They Say/I Say.” We wrote rap lyrics on the view of the loyalist and the patriot. On my part of the essay, I wrote or rapped as Barton Albert, known as the loyalist. The weaknesses I learned from the previous essays shows that it turned into strengths for this essay. For instance, the thesis was clear that the loyalist can be able to argue against it. Also, I included supporting evidence or historical context that backs up my arguments. In the other hand, our organization was here and there, but since it was a “rap battle,” the arguments followed each other very well .After getting a pass on the essay, I was amazed that I improved so much in writing. From the most weaknesses to the most strengths, I am able to determine that I had improved significantly in to writing effective essays.

Also I included the final exam of Writing 101 in my portfolio. My progress on the essays was from low to high, but for this essay, my progress went back to low. The organization of the essay was poor because I had skipped the first step of my writing process, which was to outline the essay. I sat in class writing from the top of my mind and I inserted facts that it did not go well together. Though, I was able to write down all of the requirements given for the final. I knew that I didn’t apply all of the strengths I learned from the previous essays into the final.

Entering into a college setting of writing, I knew that being dependent on templates limited my creativity. Though I know that when I get used to the templates, I can be able to support topics while using the structure. My writing process now changed than before. Two of the important elements of my process I had left out from writing the essay were outlining and revision. Knowing my weaknesses from the essays, I spent more time to go back and revise than before and I am willing to outline before writing right away. Also, I would like to work on organization which is the number one weakness on all three essays provided in the portfolio. Overall, I think I did well as a writer, progress-wise. My progress was “missing the moon” to “aiming for the stars” to “missing the moon” again. Though I know that practicing more on my weaknesses, I can be able to achieve and reach for the “stars.”

Portfolio: Essay

Bacon’s Rebellion and Class

In Exodus, Bob Marley sang, “Open your eyes and look within. Are you satisfied with the life you’re livin” (http://www.uvm.edu/~debate/dreadlibrary/skowera.html)? He was aiming for Jah people’s decision against the Babylon establishment. The dissatisfaction of Jah people relates to the lower class’s displeasure with the higher class. The social classes’ inequalities of the British colonists led to one of the most important event of American history, Bacon’s Rebellion. Bacon’s Rebellion was led by Nathaniel Bacon in the 1670s, which he supported the lower class (The American Promise 92). I agree that Bacon’s decision to revolt for the lower class was effective for the evolution of the colonies.

Like present day United States, the Chesapeake colonies also followed the caste system. The caste system is a social hierarchy which people inherit positions and rights by birth from older generations. The system ranks status based on their wealth or the wealth of older generations. Though the United States’ caste system is completely different than the colonies, but both societies obviously showed that a caste system exists. The United States’ classes are well connected, but for the Chesapeake society, they presented a wider gap between the wealthy and the poor. For example, “Virginia pivoted form a colony of rather aimless adventurers into a society of tobacco planters” (The American Promise 80). Chesapeake colonies were known as the tobacco society because tobacco was their major export. Whoever owned crops made vast amount of profit from their export. They were known as the elite planters or yeoman planters. In other words, they were considered as the higher class. When the Chesapeake colonies were economically growing, planters wanted more hands to work on their crops. This was the start of class distinction between the planters and the lower class. English immigrants agreed on a contract to serve four to five years for the planters. After their contract expired, the servants had the opportunity to become freed servants or landless colonists (The American Promise 80-85). Although the immigrants moved up a status, they were still in the lower class. The social gap between planters and freed servants led to the battle between Nathaniel and William Berkeley with other government officials.

The inequality between the wealthy and the poor classes affected Nathaniel Bacon to promote a rebellion. Robert Beverley wrote the history of the revolt in 1704, which he was in the account of the event. According to Beverley, Nathaniel bacon “had been brought up at one of the Inns of court in England, and had a moderate fortune” (“On Bacon’s Rebellion, 1704”). In other words, Bacon didn’t come from the lower class. He was part of the wealthy class. Though the higher class didn’t understand why he would support the lower class. Bacon sympathized the lower class settler’s inequality with the planters and government officials. Although The American Promise, may object the inequality between the classes because it states that the “colonists […] accepted social hierarchy and inequality as long as they believed government officials ruled for the general good” (89). Government officials also represented in the higher class because they held close ties with the elite planters. To the freed servants, the officials didn’t govern well, making the government corrupt. William Berkeley, as Virginia’s governor, thought he followed the government for the greater good. Berkeley claimed that he “doe not know of anything relative to this Country wherein [he] have acted unjustly, corruptly, or negligently in distributing equall Justice to all men” (“On Bacon’s Rebellion,” William Berkeley). I think Berkeley’s statement was inaccurate because he had contradicted himself. They “raised greate unjust taxes upon the Comonality for the advancement of private favorites” (“Declaration in the Name of the People,” Nathaniel Bacon). The elites and Berkeley showed unfairness towards the lower class because they raised taxes for their private gain of wealth. In his article, Robert Beverley maintained that “taxes […] fell heaviest on the poor people, the effect whose labor would not clothe their wives and children” (“On Bacon’s Rebellion, 1704”). His point states that the taxes burdened the poor because they cannot afford the expectations of the higher class.

Other than inequality of taxes, attaining properties were also the cause of Bacon’s Rebellion. The landless colonists immigrated to Chesapeake colonies to purchase land and had the opportunity to become prosperous. In reaching their goal, the poor encroached on Native American land to build up their own crops of tobacco or other commodities (The American Promise 84-92). I believe that they should encroach because there was no sufficient amount of land to purchase in the colonies since most of the land was taken by the wealthy. This also influenced Bacon to support the lower class to achieve their goal (and also disappointed the higher class). Though I disagree with their decision to invade and gain Indian land because it was considered stealing. Before, the colonists and the Native Americans already signed the treaty. The poor were violating that agreement. The treaty states that “to minimize contact between settlers and Indians and thereby maintain peace” (The American Promise 92). The colonists had to stay within the colonies and the Indians stay on their own land. In other words, settlers cannot encroach on Indian land. However, the landless colonists did so. In the lower class and Bacon’s perspective, I agree with their decision to encroach. The lower class disobeyed the treaty due to their inequality with the rich class. The poor class needed to provide their crops for survival and to become wealthy (The American Promise 92).

With Bacon’s help for the colonists, the rebellion’s resolution affected the Chesapeake society significantly. Government officials decided that it would be safer to fight with the Indians and did little to prevent settlers in encroaching Indian’s land (The American Promise 93). This lessened the pressure between the elite and the poor. In my opinion, I disagree with the landless’ decision to fight with the Indians for their land, but the land benefited the lower class with wealth. They reached their goal to build up their crops and support themselves. Also, the King of England approved Bacon’s law. The law was made by Bacon when he was elected as a burgess in 1676. Bacon’s law “gave local settlers a voice in setting tax levies, forbade office holders from demanding bribes, or other extra fees for carrying out their duties, and restored the vote to all free men” (The American Promise 93). After the rebellion, the King’s approval shaped Chesapeake society into equality between the classes. The reduction of indenture servants transitioned Chesapeake colonies to a slave labor system which they used enslaved Africans (The American Promise 97). Both lower and higher classes had little difference between them since then they were considered as superior whites.

The Chesapeake society relates to the society of American life today. In relation, present day America consists of inequality by class. Social status in the U.S. would not be an issue like Bacon’s Rebellion, but there is discrimination between classes. In American culture, high schools are composed of ranks of popularity. As a high school student, it is easy to distinct the kinds of cliques or groups. Some cliques are higher than the other cliques based on education (GPA or year), wealth, income, or profession. For example, a person, belonging to a popular group, running for class president against a seemingly “nerd” would most likely receive the most votes no matter how they can demonstrate leadership. This means that “popular” people have more privileges than those who are not popular.

Social hierarchy was one of the primary causes of Bacon’ Rebellion in American history. Differences between classes were a major effect in the colonies. The effect led to the cause of the rebellion and how it set a role of reformation, which in turn, the rebellion helped the satisfaction of life the classes wanted. The social status of then and today tried to strengthen to become as equal and to have the right to improve life as one pleases.

Sources:

1) Holy Zion! A Study of Ethiopianism in Rastafarianism with a Focus on the Concept Of Ethiopia as Zion http://www.uvm.edu/~debate/dreadlibrary/skowera.html

2) The American Promise

3) On Bacon's Rebellion, 1704 Robert Beverley

4) On Bacon's Rebellion William Berkeley

5) Declaration in the Name of the People Nathaniel Bacon

Portfolio: Essay

The Whig versus the Tory

“Life, liberty, property” was one of the primary reasons of independence-seekers that led to separation between them and the pro-British (The American Promise 190). The characters below, Barton Albert and Bradford Kaine, are in conflict in the American Revolution. Barton was appointed in 1762 as a royal governor who portrays as William Franklin, Benjamin Franklin’s son. Barton was a loyalist who was sympathetic towards patriots’ views, before he was appointed in 1762. His views changed when the Stamp Act controversy occurred. Barton Albert is considered as the “Tory”, which was a label used by patriots. Barton, as the loyalist, labeled patriots "Whigs." Bradford Kaine portrays Thomas Paine, who was a patriot seeking independence from the British Empire. He was born in Britain and came over to live in America to take part in the revolution. The debate, with a modern twist in rapping, took place before the battle of Lexington and Concord in 1775.

Barton Albert:

Colonel Dincklage wrote that "Neighbors are on opposite sides
Children are against their fathers"
What side should I decide (Raphael, 152)?
Well I’m the royal governor
Please call me Barton Albert I took an oath in sixty-two (1762)
Against my father's whiggish view ("William Franklin of New Jersey", 360)
Whig listen up,
I want to tell you something,
You’ve come here as a British,
You’ll always be a British,
We’ve helped you as one whole,
We’ll treat you as our subjects.
Well what do you want more?

Bradford Kaine:

I'm New York's own Bradford Kaine,
Letting you know they are much too vain.
We came to America to be free,
How else to express it but to pour this tea?

Barton Albert:

Listen up, do you hear?
Remember the war of Seven Years?
We fought alongside against the French (The American Promise, 182)
for they were “trespassing on [our land]” (The American Promise, 175)
for they wanted to trade for furs.
In the War, they allied with Indians.
What did the British do Against them?
We all use our men (The American Promise, 175).
Seventeen-seventeen-sixty-three (1763),
the idiotic French withdrew.
The British signed the Treaty of Paris,
But the Indians still continued.
What else did the British do?
The British “called the Proclamation of 1763” (The American Promise, 182)
“Influenced [by] Lord Bute” (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 362).
Lord Bute influenced Barton Albert into loyalists’ perspectives.
To limit trade with brutes [Indians],
I agree with him to post an army,
And to protect from our enemies.
The Proclamation of 1763 aims at minimizing violence between the settlers and Indians by limiting trade. Lord Bute’s decision was to post a British army to separate the Indians and the settlers (The American Promise, 182).

Bradford Kaine:

One-to-the-seven-to-six-to-the-three (1763),
Look what your people have done to me.
They want us to contribute, to their stupid army.
You agree to help them, silly little Tory.
Nine count them nine. That's how long they've fought.
France and England want to expand their territories, I simply do not.
Yet you agree and I'm unsure why.
For they are only using us
This thought I have expressed is something you should apply.

Barton Albert:

I was “sympathetic towards [the] whiggish views,”
but all had to change in seventeen-sixty-two (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 362).
Northern colonist suffered an economic depression.
After Seven Years we’re heavily in debt
borrowing loans kept the debt growing. (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 363)
I proposed an act to issue a new paper money.
I sent this act to the king to make a prosperous colony.
The king disapproved it because “the notes had in effect
been made legal Tender at the loan office” (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 364).
The Stamp Act came along
Whig, you think it’s a threat
But who would pay off the money?
You’re the British Subject.

Bradford Kaine:

How dare you think it's okay to be taxed?
They tax our documents, permits, commercial contracts, newspapers, playing cards, pamphlets, and wills.
The fact that you find this acceptable gives me chills.

Barton Albert:

Bradford, you’re responsible in paying the Stamp Act tax
For the Seven Year’s Debt
Taxed any paper like Bills of lading.
The tax was designed to raise more money (The American Promise, 186).

Bradford Kaine:

"No taxation without representation."
Remember the Magna Carta that formed this nation?
This isn't fair, the way you just don't care.
We left to be free; they’re keeping us from that.
Don't you see? Let us govern ourselves
And let them keep to themselves.

Barton Albert:

I know that you say “No tax without representation” (Nardo 13).
You said
that the parliament has no right to tax.
“The Americans are represented
[As British] in the virtual sense” (Nardo 30).
You should not exempt Americans are Englishmen
Although I want to tempt
Taxes were levied
By American Whigs and Tories (Nardo 32).

Bradford Kaine:

"We have it in our power to begin the world over again.”
Come to our side and bring your men.
We are not British subjects, but Americans at that.
Come here so we can have a little chit chat.
I believe we should be separated from Britain.
Why don't you agree my Goodman?

Barton Albert:

I have no patience with these rioters
I consider it as a serious offense
I’d be happy to remove all these grievers,
but I must make an example,
the laws that they trample.
America wanted protection
Mother country provides them
a supplied stationed army.

Bradford Kaine:

Seventeen seventy (1770), five were killed.
Killed by the Brit's own hands.
This is what started our silly little war.
How dare you treat us like the poor?
We have no rights!
My anger now ignites.
We are being weighed down this was suppose to be our town!
They can't invade like this,
How can you side with them?
Look at how they cause mayhem!
We are enslaved just because of how we've behaved.

Barton Albert:

Americans have the same right as the British.
Parliament is abusing rights
as you wish.
You are confused with you rights.
There are two types, right?
One is personal,
the other political.
Now tell me what’s the difference?
Let me tell you ,good riddance.
Your personal rights are in common with the British,
Your political rights are local.
You want power for yourselves
That means you’re selfish (Nardo 51).
Each colony signed an agreement
to become a British Corporation,
to regulate trade and to tax,
and quartering troops, relax.
These are not abuses,
Your personal rights are not abused.

Bradford Kaine:

I'm not selfish Whig!
We just want to be free.
Our rights are being abused!
Can't you see?

Barton Albert:

Again being you as selfish
Believing British rule
To be an elimination
So you loyalists can rule.
There'll be no reconciliation
Something I had hoped for.
But if there was,
Everything will go back to normal.
Bigger population,
Value to the land,
Increasing prosperity to all.
The things I had hoped for (Nardo 63-65).
I feel that the war is starting
The tensions that are lurking
I had tried my best
I cared for the colonies welfare
Please give me a rest
I had so little to gain.
Too much to lose.
Parting away with father and friend
Overthrow the Mother (Britain) they'd choose,
But I believe in compromise.
The King, Parliament is right
But better the overthrow you might ("William Franklin Of New Jersey" 378-380)

Bradford Kaine:

Let's see how the war will be doing
You'll be gone, gone, going

Barton Albert:
Yes, let's see.

The “rappers”, Barton Albert and Bradford Kaine brought back memories from the Seven Year’s War and the British taxes that shaped their position in supporting/against the British Empire. After the intense “rap debate” between Albert and Kaine, the first year of the Revolutionary War started in few days (Lexington and Concord as the first battle). Albert and Kaine, as a loyalist or a patriot, would face many challenges and obstacles during the War and who would still bravely uphold their position.




Sources:
1) William Franklin of New Jersey
Fennelly, Catherine. "William Franklin of New Jersey." The William and Mary Quarterly 3rd ser. 6.3 (1949): 361-382. JSTOR. Highline Community College Library, Federal Way. 1 Nov. 2007.
2) The American Revolution
Nardo, Don. The American Revolution. San Diego: Greenhaven P, Inc., 1998. 6-143.
3)The American Promise
4) Music of the American Revolution
"Music of the American Revolution." National Park Service Museum. 17 Mar. 2005. 2 Nov. 2007.

Portfolio: Final Exam

“Why [consider history]? Simply because I am interested in the past? No, if one means that […] a history of the past in terms of the present. Yes, if one means […] the history of the present” (Michel Foucault). His quote can be found in one of his last works, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of Prison which was published in 1975. Discipline and Punish was about the evolution in French society’s punishment. He explains about how the change from monarchial punishment to disciplinary punishment was in a short time. Though, from his quote he was attempting to show that there was more into history and that history is not all about the past, but the present.

Foucault said, “History was full of holes as gruyere cheese” (Strathern). From Discipline and Punish, he said, “Why [consider history]? Simply because I am interested in the past?” (Foucault). This doesn’t mean he had disinterest in history. In his early years, he loved reading history. He was influenced by Hegel because Hegel’s philosophy was that there was something else below the events of history. Hegel states, “In history we are concerned what has been and what is; in philosophy, on the other hand, we are concerned not with what belongs exclusively to the past or even the future, but what is both now and eternally is, with reason” (Strathern 16). There was a meaning or a hidden structure of history. Foucault meant history would be nothing without the true meaning of it. This quarter in history class, I studied the history of the United States up to the 1800s. Of course, I learned about the events happened, what lead to the events, and I identified key figures who were involved in the events. Though one concept left out about learning history was why did it happened, what was the reason or truth. In Foucault in 90 Minutes, the truth was not “something given, something which we have to discover –it is something we must create ourselves” (Strathern 16). When I studied about philosophers, like Hobbes and Locke, I understand that their concept of human nature ties in to leading of the occasion and how it was reacted. I thought that history would be just different significant events, but I learned that human nature was always behind history’s structure. Come to find out, history was the set of different events, but with similarities (also called trend). Without the true meaning behind history, I would only just learn about the events and how it was caused.

From Foucault’s quote, “history of the past in terms if the present”, it means that the significant events from the chronological record holds connections with similarities. Foucault was trying to say that the past is the present and we could understand that the “past showed how we could understand the present “(Strathern). He meant that history is the present. History is basically a repeat of its self. Foucault’s approach to history is the present made me realized that history hold similarities. Knowing the similarities would help me understand history better. It wasn’t difficult for me to relate, for instance, as a woman in the Daughters of Liberty that played a role against the British. Again from learning the meaning behind history, human nature will always be the same. The human nature concept gave me another way of studying history.

I have always considered that history was a boring subject. Learning about the significant events were useless for me that it sticks to my head and a year, or a quarter, it would be gone. Foucault's quote gave me another idea why history was so interesting to learn. I realized he meant we are living the past. I meant was that learning history is like learning right now.

Sources:
Strathern, Paul. Foucault in 90 Minutes. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2000.

Rough Draft - Reflective Letter

Les Brown quoted, "Shoot for the moon--even if you miss, you'll land amongst the stars". I can relate to his quote with my progression as a writer. At the start of my first essay, it was difficult for me to transition from high school to college writing. I thought did well in writing essays in high school, but I ended up having trouble writing with the standards of college. The more I learned of my weaknesses, I was able to improve and modify my writing. From my first essay to the last, changing my writing philosopy and my writing process have shown that I improved greatly.

My writing philosophy then was that I follow templates. The templates I learned was for the thesis. For example, a statement and reasons why. Also, I learned how to organize information into an outline provided. My writing process involved using outlines. Sometimes I go with the flow and "throw up" jumbled facts. Writing then was a complete mess.

In collaboration of Writing 101 and History 121, the first essay I wrote was about Bacon’s Rebellion.The shift from high school to college awfully affected this essay that it was easy to identify what weaknesses I need to work on. The essay didn't represent as the "argumentative essay." The thesis was vague and it wasn't arguable. I did well in structuring main points of the argument, but the transition in between the paragraphs were confusing. I did present supporting evidence, but I wrote too much of it that it becomes informational. The excessive information didn't focus on much of the arguments. Also, the lack of opposing arguments should have been incorporated into the essay. I made strong relations, but the word choice throws off the whole connection that it made no sense. Learning from these weaknesses, I made critical improvements into the following academic papers.

One of the following academic papers presenting in the portfolio is "Rhode Island's Debate Over Ratification of the Constitution." The advantage of writing this paper was that it was with a group. We were able to review each other's parts and made some points on what we can further improve on. We presented major points of the argument, being as the anti-federalists, and included relevant supporting evidence, but then again the organization was confusing because the transition were jumpy. Though the strengths of this essay was that the thesis was complex and arguable. It gave a sense what the structure would be like (though it did not in the end). Not only the essay explained the arguments, it pinpoints the antagonistic side. From the most weaknesses to the most strengths, I am able to determine that I had improved significantly in to writing effective essays.

Entering into a college setting of writing, I knew that being dependent on templates limited my creativity. Though I know that when I get used to the templates, I can be able to support topics while using the structure. My writing process now didn't really change much. Though one of the important element of the process I had left out from writing the essay was revision. Knowing my weaknesses from, I spent more time to go back and revise than before.

AOD Blog #10 - Mediation

Though this is not a current event, I remember when I was a conflict manager in 4th or 5th grade. I volunteered to watch the kindergarten/first grade recess and help solve solutions if the children have problems. I remember a girl who came up to me, telling me she was hit by a boy. She then helped me find the boy. Then I asked them questions like "Are you alright?" or "What did you do wrong?" or "Why were you hitting?". Come to find out, the boy hit her for no reason. And then I notified his and her teacher about their situation, they apologized, and their teacher set a disciplinary action for the boy.

Essay #3 Reflections

1) Group interactions

We did pretty well in researching our materials. Though when were planning the outline, I think our group interaction faded. There were some points that our group members disagreed. We argued but we didn't have enough information to back up our argument. The outline then was incomplete but me and another group member brainstormed the outline at the end of the class. I sent emails to the other group members to take a look at the outline in the wiki (and to edit it). When we were doing our rough drafts, we split up paragraphs (from the outline) to write. After the peer reviews, we were adding last minute stuff into the draft. Me and another group member emailed (multiple times) to our group of the corrected essay. Though the other half of our group didn't respond to the emails. Though I got one or two replies by one group member but the email they replied was already old. I guess that the emails I sent is traveling slow?? Since there was no respond to our corrected essay, me and my group member decided to just send the email to Craig and Ben. Me and the other group member kept in touch also with Myspace.

2)Use of contract

According to the contract, I think we did pretty well on distributing work. We split the paragraphs amongst ourselves and had the time to look over on other paragraphs (for transitioning). We did succeed on the completion of the work, but I know that we didn't really laid a hand on the essay during the Thanksgiving break. So we weren't ahead of our work instead the essay became a last minute work. I think that our group members maintained their portion of the work. But the emails I sent, concerned of one paragraph that did not have a hook , wasn't replied or corrected. That work was left to another group member. When we were done correcting the final draft, I sent emails to agree on the finalization of the essay. Only one replied and agreed. It was reaching to midnight and I had no choice but to email the essay (still the other group members didn't agree on the finalization). Attendance wasn't mandatory for us but the work completion matters. When a group member was absent, I emailed them what we did on that day and what they should do for the project.

3)Use of wiki

I noticed that I'm doing a lot of contributions for the wiki. I helped out on the outline. Also, I inserted a notes page where I put the notes from my reading to give a sense of direction of what we'll be writing for the essay. Though I did help on finding sources and annotations, I completely forgot to submit my annotations of the books I used for the paper. I ended up submitting it in the wiki on the last minute. Luckily, I emailed myself the bibliography and the annotations a long time ago.

Final Draft

Vince Coppola
Junalyn Dela Cruz
Sioned Fearon and
Cymone Lee-Johnson
11/28/07 - Hist 121 & Writ 101

Rhode Island's Debate over Ratification of the Constitution

Federalism is the greatest thing that ever happened to this country! Sure some may say this, but it is a huge overstatement. The truth is, anti-federalism held a much safer outcome for the maintenance of sovereignty in each individual state as opposed to the ideology of the federalists.

Anti-federalists mainly populated the state of Rhode Island at the time of the ratification of the Constitution in 1787. A significant reason they were opposed to the ratification was their belief that a central government would deny many of the rights and powers of individual states. Reasons behind this strong disapproval were partially because of the Charter of Rhode Island, which contained the rules and orders for the use of the general assembly of the state of Rhode Island. The state had an issue with the fact that the central government would overpower the individual states. But the majority of Rhode Island believed this would not be good for them, and that a small, statewide system of government would be more efficient. There was also a great deal of concern about the Land Ordinance of 1785, where each state boundary extended well beyond the boundaries originally assigned to the state. It stated that the land of the old northwest should be sold in order to pay off the national debt. This land of course, included Rhode Island, and it was a worry to Rhode Island because they did not have claims on any western land, while other states did. Finally, there was an issue with taxation. Rhode Island did not want to ratify the constitution until their state debts had been paid off. If they were to ratify with debts still upon them, they would then accumulate more debt from the new government.

How can Rhode Island accept the Constitution when they did not attend the Philadelphia Convention (Moehn 94)? "The Federalist Papers" written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, states that "Rhode Island's legislature, controlled by a radical agrarian part, sent no delegation" to Philadelphia in 1787 to revise the Articles of Confederation (30). The reason for Rhode Island’s refusal to the federalists’ ‘'urgent need for power-sharing between States and Federal authorities" in the Convention was that Rhode Island is concerned about giving the federal government too much power (“The Federalist Papers”). Rhode Island was content with the liberty and the independence based on their stated constitution. They had no intention of giving the state's independence up to a federal government. The state constitution, or the Charter of 1664, was fought for during the Revolutionary War. Rhode Island was satisfied of their organization of their political group, Country Party. The Country Party was known for issuing paper currency to pay off Revolutionary War debts (Doherty 96). Rhode Island believed that running democracy in their state government would be more sufficient than running democracy as one whole nation. In Shay’s Rebellion, the confederation wanted to tax every state for the debts but with democracy, the right for their voice, people oppressed against them. Affected by Shay’s Rebellion in 1786, Rhode Island knew that it's better for their government to control their state than having all states to be controlled by the central government (Doherty 100). Anti-federalists understand that the federalists proposed republicanism, which was to give voice to the people through the senators. Though Rhode Island’s concern was giving too much power to the executive would be going back to British shoes. America as a whole would run under a "king."

An issue that played a major role in Rhode Island being an anti-federalist state was the probable outcome that a central government would overpower the individual states. Rhode Island had just fought passionately to steer away from a monarchical rule, and was now being pressured to go back in that direction. Plenty of colonies having claims to land westward didn’t help Rhode Island become in favor of the Constitution any faster. Rhode Island was one of the few colonies that didn’t have any land claims. Other colonies having land claims, with the expectations of expanding, in the event of a central government, would have superiority. Other colonies, such as Virginia, who had land claims from Kentucky to Wisconsin, would easily overpower such a small colony as Rhode Island in a central government. Those fortunate colonies that held more land had the advantage over others that didn’t, such as economically and military wise. Loss of independence was greatly feared, thus explains why no delegates were sent to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Rhode Island was perfectly content with the previous laws set forth, which enabled them to have more freedom than most other colonies. A central government would take away so many of the advantages they have, in order to make them equal with every other colony. The residents of Rhode Island worked too hard to gain their independence and liberties, and were too grateful to risk that for an unsure idea.

Since Rhode Island was the last and final state to ratify the Constitution, it must have been severely anti-federalist. One of the primary reasons why the majority of Rhode Island chose not to be governed by a central government was because of the issue of taxation. Unlike the federalists, who were okay with the idea of a broader government taxing at their will, the anti-federalists in Rhode Island feared that there would also be horrible side effects of a more powerful government. The officials feared that since the citizens would have to pay taxes to both the state and the federal government, they would become too burdened with all of the costs. If a citizen became too burdened by taxes, they could simply refuse to pay any taxes. The anti-federalists believed that in this situation, the federal government would simply alleviate the state taxes and only collect their own taxes from citizens. Located in a primary document by Brutus, a writer of one of the numerous anti-federalists letters, he offers his view very plainly, “Suppose then that both governments should lay taxes, duties, and excises, and it should fall so heavy on the people that they would be unable, or be so burdensome that they would refuse to pay them both — would it not be necessary that the general legislature should suspend the collection of the state tax? It certainly would. For, if the people could not, or would not pay both, they must be discharged from the tax to the state, or the tax to the general government could not be collected. — The conclusion therefore is inevitable, that the respective state governments will not have the power to raise one shilling in any way, but by the permission of the Congress.” The federalists in Rhode Island must have seen this sort of thinking as a crazy tangent. They thought that this sort of undermining would never happen, but despite their beliefs, the issue of taxation remained one of the most important and pressing topics to the anti-federalists in Rhode Island.

For numerous reasons, Rhode Island was opposed to the ratification up until May 29, 1790. They really had no choice, they were threatened to be treated as a foreign government. If they refused to ratify, there would be nothing for them.

Individual Responses
Vince: For me to choose a side of the federalism vs. anti-federalism debate, I would simply weigh the historical reasons for both alongside the present information of how everything worked out. Essentially, America today WORKS. Our country has a thriving economy and a very strong military. I believe that the federalists had the best idea with creating a sturdy union between all of the states. The anti-federalists had some legitimate concerns about taxation and their security as states, but ultimately, federalism clearly prevailed. If one were to imagine the current situation of our states if the constitution hadn’t been ratified, it would probably be filled with much internal
conflict and civil wars. Therefore, federalism held the best possible outcome for America.
Junalyn: The debate between the federalists and anti-federalist were rickety because some individual states took longer in ratifying the Constitution. I agree with the individual states that took their time in ratifying the Constitution. The states were concerned about their rights and taxation. They wanted to take care of their war debts before accepting the Constitution. Concerned about the state rights, the Congress incorporated most of the states’ rights into the Bill of Rights, which was then used in the Constitution. This helped the anti-federalists’ satisfaction into rectifying the Constitution. The anti-federalists wanted to take care of their state governments before going into a federal government.
Sioned: If there was to be something like the constitutional debate to happen in my time, I believe I would take the side of federalism. Federalism is a better option in my opinion in a few ways. It unites people, thus making it easier to live. I think it is much less chaotic to have a strong central government than multiple smaller individual governments with their own different laws. Anti-federalist ways can get very out of hand, and there are probably more problems when everyone has different rules and regulations.
Cymone: To choose to be a federalist or anti-federalist is not something easily done. They both had key points, and depending on how they were effectively integrated, would determine the status and success of America today. I am personally torn between the two. I agree with the federalists that there should be a central government. In order for America to prosper, there needs to be some sort of unification amongst all the states. A central government aids states in the fact that the individual states won’t have to feel that they have to deal with their issues on there own and will have support from other states. I agree with the anti-federalists that the individual states come before the central government. I personally would deal with the concerns of my own state before national concerns because it is closer to home. While some can easily decide between the two, I can be satisfied with agreeing on certain ideas from each party.

Sources:
1.Doherty, Craig A., and Katherine M. Doherty. Rhode Island. New York: Facts on File, Inc., 2005.
2.Moehn, Heather. The U.S. Constitution: a Primary Source Investigation Into the Fundamental Law of the United States. 1st ed. New York: The Rosen Group, Inc., 2003.
3.Kramnick, Isaac, ed. The Federalist Papers. New York: Penguin Books, 1987.
4.http://www.city-data.com/states/Rhode-Island-History.html
5.http://www.jstor.org/view/00223816/di976634/97p0326q/2?frame=noframe&userID=a89c4f45@highline.edu/01c0a848740050157f7&dpi=3&config=jstor
6.http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution_history.html

Rough Draft

Rhode Island's Debate over Ratification of the Constitution

The state of Rhode Island was mainly populated by antifederalists at the time of the ratification of the constitution in 1787. A signifigant reason they were opposed the ratification was their belief that a central government would deny much of the rights and power of individual states. Reasons behind this strong dissaproval were partially because of the Charter of Rhode Island which was the manual with rules and orders for the use of the general assembly of the state of Rhode Island. The state had an issue with the fact that the central government would overpower the individual states. But the majority of Rhode Island believed this would not be good for them, and that a small, statewide system of government would be more effecient. There was also a great deal of concern about the land ordinance of 1785, where each states boundaries extended well beyond the boundaries originly assigned to the state. It stated that the land of the old northwest should be sold in order to pay of the national debt. This land of course, included Rhode Island, and it was a worry to Rhode Island because they did not have claims on any western land, while other states did. Finally, there was an issue with taxation. Rhode Island did not want to ratify the constitution until their state debts had been payed off. If they were to ratify with debts still upon them, they would then accumulate more debt from the new government.

How can Rhode Island accept the Constitution when they did not attend the Philadelphia Convention (Moehn 94)? "The Federalis Papers" written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay states that "Rhode Island's legislature, controlled by a radical agrarian part, sent no delegation" to Philadelphia in 1787 to revise the Articles of Confederation (30). The reason in refusing to their 'urgent need for power-sharing between States and Federal authorities" in the Convention was that Rhode Island are concerned about giving the federal government too much power. Rhode Island are content with the liberty and the independence based on their stated constitution. They had no intention of giving the state's independence up to a federal government. The state constitution, or the Charter of 1664, was fought for during the Revolutionary War. Giving too much power to the executive would be going back to British shoes. America as a whole would be run under a "king".

Since Rhode Island was the last and final state to ratify the Constitution, it must have been severely anti-federalist. One of the primary reasons why the majority of Rhode Island chose not to be governed by a general government was because of the issue of taxation. Unlike the federalists, who were okay with the idea of a broader government taxing at their will, the anti-federalists in Rhode Island feared that there would also be horrible side effects of a more powerful government. The officials feared that since the citizens would have to pay taxes to both the state and the federal government, they would become too burdened with all of the costs. If a citizen became too burdened by taxes, they could simply refuse to pay any taxes. The anti-federalists believed that in this situation, the federal government would simply alleviate the state taxes and only collect their own taxes from citizens. Located in a primary document by Brutus, a writer of one of the numerous anti-federalists letters, he offers his view very plainly,
“Suppose then that both governments should lay taxes, duties, and excises, and it should fall so heavy on the people that they would be unable, or be so burdensome that they would refuse to pay them both — would it not be necessary that the general legislature should suspend the collection of the state tax? It certainly would. For, if the people could not, or would not pay both, they must be discharged from the tax to the state, or the tax to the general government could not be collected. — The conclusion therefore is inevitable, that the respective state governments will not have the power to raise one shilling in any way, but by the permission of the Congress.”
The federalists in Rhode Island must have seen this sort of thinking as a crazy tangent. They thought that this sort of undermining would never happen, but despite their beliefs, the issue of taxation remained one of the most important and pressing topics to the anti-federalists in Rhode Island.

For numerous reasons, Rhode Island was opposed to the ratification up until May 29, 1790. They really had no choice, they were threatened to be treated as a foreign government. If they refused to ratify, there would be nothing for them.

AOD Blog #9 - Building Social Capital

When I thought about what I should write for this blog, I thought of Thanksgiving. On Thanksgiving Day, I forgot to mention about an important conversation I had. I had a conversation with two college students whom were friends of my uncle. One is from University of Washington and the other from Seattle University. The conversation was very helpful for me because they mostly talk about student life in their campuses. They adviced pros and cons on the colleges they go to and the colleges that I'm interested in. Such as Seattle Pacific University. They know that I liked small classes and interaction with students and teachers in college. So one of them said that UW have very large classes and it might not have a close interaction with the teachers; the other, from SU, said that they have small classes. When I mentioned about SPU, one of them (from SU) adviced not to go there because of the students (in the way they behave, present themselves) since she went there on her freshman year. I don't know if that's true, but I will sometime visit the campus.

AOD Blog #8 - Diversity

For Thanksgiving Day, I went to my uncle's house. He invited many of his family and friends over and it was a mixture of American and Filipino. To my uncle's American family and friends, filipino food was kind of new to them. During lunch/dinner, there were many variety of foods from Filipino and American culture. Everyone enjoyed and explored tasting new kinds of food from different cultures.

AOD Blog #7 - Celebration and Appreciation

Last Saturday, I volunteered at Cavanough Pond in Maple Valley with Key Club. We planted trees and tear down blackberry bushes in helping the salmons' environment. This event also included YMCA members. After we were done with our work, YMCA and Key Club gathered and split into groups. I was in a group with students who is in YMCA. In our groups, we played mad libs. We chose words that related to the event and put those in the paragraph provided. After our groups were done, everyone got into a circle and presented our mad libs (we had a great laugh).

Essay #2 Reflection

1)Your progress from essay1 to essay2?

I think I did better in Essay#2. I used my time well and put much effort into this essay. I have researched well and tried to do my best to implement my character's point of view into the essay. Unlike Essay #1, I did not procastinate for the Essay#2! My rough draft was done by Friday including all the work cited sources. In the weekend, I used my time to edit, cut out, add in some 'rap' paragraphs. I did my best to follow the requirements of the rubic. Such as explaining historical context and, again, puting into my character's point of view. I worked hard that I acknowledge not only to my grade, but for my partner's.

2)How did your process mesh with your partner's?

I think I did most of the work into the essay. My part of the essay was done, done, done. All I had to do is wait for my partner's part and put it into mine's, over the weekend. The only time I recieved my partner's part of the essay was just last night. When my part of the essay was finished for the "rough draft day" all my partner had to do is to implement her argument relating to the paragraphs. My partner's paragraphs were good in the rhyming and stating her argument, but it wasn't that informative. I do critique on my partner's work. But it was too late to do so when I just got my partner's essay last night.

3)How did you handle creative conflict? If you didn't, what made your collaboration work?

My partner and I did well in the beginning because we had good communication including Myspace and cell phones. But when the days proceeds to the due date, I think it had faded away. It was kind of frustrating when parts of the essay weren't being done on time because the communication was poor. I was done with my essay part and all I had to do was to wait for my partner's part. It took a while to get my partner's essay over the weekend. Since we had the communication, it would be understandable if my partner contacted me if some event came up. Though I didn't recieve any, I assumed she was procastinating. I have contacted her through email on what to put for the essay, but no response.Then again, I felt like I did most of the work (I felt like I was being depended on). Such as organizing, structuring the essay. I felt like I was being a leader planning out for the essay. There was no response, objections, or critiques of the essay. It was more like of a "Okay, that's good" and we'll just do more. I got critiques mostly from other peers. Overall, the essay was good. The arguments are relevant to each other.

Loyalism vs. Patriotism Essay

"The Whig versus The Tory"

By Junalyn Dela Cruz and Naomi Rinehart

The characters below, Barton Albert and Bradford Kaine, are in conflict in the American Revolution. Barton was appointed in 1762 as a royal governor who portrays as William Franklin, Benjamin Franklin’s son. Barton was a loyalist who was sympathetic towards patriots’ views, before he was appointed in 1762. His views changed when the Stamp Act controversy occurred. Barton Albert is considered as the “tory”, which was a label used by patriots. Barton, as the loyalist, labeled patriots "whigs." Bradford Kaine portrays Thomas Paine. He was born in Britian and came over to live in America to take part in the revolution. Bradford was a patriot. All this took place in 1762. The ‘rap debate’ starts from the Stamp Act leading up to the start of the first war of the American Revolution.


Barton Albert: Colonel Dincklage wrote that
"Neighbors are on opposite sides
Children are against their fathers"
What side should I decide (Raphael, 152)?
Well I’m the royal governor
Please call me Barton Albert
I took an oath in sixty-two (’62)
Against my father's whiggish view ("William Franklin of New Jersey", 360)
Whig listen up,
I want to tell you something,
You’ve come here as a British,
You’ll always be a British,
We’ve helped you as one whole,
We’ll treat you as our subjects.
Well what do you want more?

Bradford Kaine:I'm New York's own Bradford Kaine,

letting you know they are much too vain.

We came to America to be free,

how else to express it but to pour this tea?

Barton Albert: Listen up, do you hear?
Remember the war of seven years?
We fought alongside against the French (The American Promise, 182)
For they were “trespassing on [our land]” (The American Promise, 175)
For they wanted to trade for furs.
In the War, they allied with Indians
What did the British do
Against them?
We all use our men (The American Promise, 175).
Seventeen-seventeen-sixty-three (1763),
The idiotic French withdrew
The British signed the Treaty of Paris
But the Indians still continued
What else did the British do?
The British “called the Proclamation of 1763” (The American Promise, 182)
“Influenced [by] Lord Bute” Lord Bute influenced Barton Alboert into loyalism (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 362).
To limit trade with brutes [Indians],
I agree with him to post an army,
And to protect from our enemies.
The Proclamation of 1763 aims at minimizing violence between the settlers and Indians by limiting trade. Lord Bute’s decision was to post a British army to separate the Indians and the settlers (The American Promise, 182).

Bradford Kaine: One to the seven to six to the three.

Look what your people have done to me.

They want us to contribute, to their stupid army.

You agree to help them, silly little tory.

Nine, count them nine. That's how long they've fought.

France and England want to expand their territories, I simply do not.

Yet you agree and I'm unsure why.

For they are only using us.

This thought i have expressed is something you should apply.

Barton Albert: I was “sympathetic towards [the] whiggish views”
But all had to change
In seventeen-sixty-two (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 362).
Northern colonist suffered an economic depression
After Seven Years we’re heavily in debt
Borrowing loans kept the debt growing (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 363)
I proposed an act
To issue a new paper money
I sent this act to the king
To make a prosperous colony
The king disapproved it
because “the notes had in effect been made legal
Tender at the loan office” (“William Franklin of New Jersey”, 364)
The Stamp Act comes along
Whig, you think it’s a threat
But who would pay off the money?
You’re the British Subject.

Bradford Kaine: How dare you think it's ok to be taxed?

They tax our documents, permits, comercial contracts, newspapers, playing cards, pamphlets, and wills.

The fact that you find this acceptable gives me chills.

Barton Albert: Bradford, you’re responsible
In paying the Stamp Act tax
For the Seven Year’s Debt
Taxed any paper like
Bills of lading
The tax was designed to raise more money (The American Promise, 186).

Bradford Kaine: "No taxation without representation."

Remember the Magna Carta that formed this nation?

This isn't fair,the way you just don't care.

We left to be free, They're keeping us from that.

Don't you see? Let us govern ourselves

and let them keep to themselves.

Barton Albert: I know that you say
“No tax without representation” (Nardo 13).
You said
That the parliament has no right to tax
“The Americans are represented
[As British] in the virtual sense” (Nardo 30).
You should not exempt
Americans are Englishmen
Although I want to tempt
Taxes were levied
By American whigs and tories (Nardo 32).

Bradford Kaine: "We have it in our power to begin the world over again. "

Come to our side and bring your men.

We are not british subjects, but Americans at that.

Come here so we can have a little chit chat.

I believe we should be seperated from Britian.

Why don't you agree my goodman?

Barton Albert: I have no patience with these rioters
I consider it as a serious offense
I’d be happy to remove all these grievers
But I must make an example
The laws that they trample
America wanted protection
Mother country provides them
A supplied stationed army

Bradford Kaine: Seventeen seventy, five were killed.

Killed by the Brit's own hands.

This is what started our silly little war.

How dare you treat us like the poor?

We have no rights!

My anger now ignites.

We are being weighed downthis was suppose to be our town!

They can't invade like this,

How can you side with them?

Look at how they cause mayhem!

We are enslavedjust because of how we've behaved.

Barton Albert: Americans have the same right as the British
Parliament is abusing rights
As you wish
You are confused with you rights
There are two types, right?
One is personal
The other political
Now tell me what’s the difference?
Let me tell you good riddance
Your personal rights are in common with the British
Your political rights are local
You want power for yourselves
That means you’re selfish (Nardo 51).

Each colony signed an agreement

to become a British Corporation

to regulate trade and to tax

and quartering troops, relax.

These are not abuses

Your personal rights are not abused.

Bradford Kaine:I'm not selfsih whig!

We just want to be free.

Our rights are being abused!

Can't you see?

Barton Albert: Again being you as selfish

Believing British rule

To be an elimination

So you loyalists can rule.

There'll be no reconciliation

Something I had hoped for

But if there was

Everything will go back to normal

Bigger population

Value to the land

Increasing prosperity to all.

The things I had hoped for (Nardo 63-65).

I feel that the war is starting

The tensions that are lurking

I had tried my best

i cared for the colonies welfare

Give me a rest

I had so little to gain

Too much to lose

Parting away with father and friend

Overthrow the Mother (Britain) they'd choose

But I believe in compromise

The King, Parliament are right

But better the overthrow you might ("William Franklin Of New Jersey" 378-380)

Bradford Kaine: Let's see how the war will be doing

You'll be gone, gone, going

Barton Albert: Yes, let's see.

Sources:
1) William Frank lin of New Jersey
Fennelly, Catherine. "William Franklin of New Jersey." The William and Mary Quarterly 3rd ser. 6.3 (1949): 361-382. JSTOR. Highline Community College Library, Federal Way. 1 Nov. 2007 .
2) The American Revolution
Nardo, Don. The American Revolution. San Diego: Greenhaven P, Inc., 1998. 6-143.
3) The American Promise
4) Music of the American Revolution (for our music background)
"Music of the American Revolution." National Park Service Museum. 17 Mar. 2005. 2 Nov. 2007 .

The audio is in process...

AOD Blog #6 - Active Listening

On Monday, our standing juniors went to the National College Fair in Seattle. This was a great opportunity for me because I can be able to come out of my shell and talk with the dean of admissions/admission counselors. I took the freshman recruiter's advice in making good impressions and good communication with the admissions (should shake hands and give good eye contact). I asked questions, such as "what is the average class size?", and encouraged the speaker to answer with relevant information which helped me understand about more of their school and helps me picture myself in that school. I asked follow-up questions, such as "how is the relationship between students and instructors?", if the speaker did not elaborate on the first question. Sometimes I paraphrase or repeat what they said but add a twist of a question if I misunderstood. In the end, showing interests in their college I follow-up with comments like "excellent."

AOD Blog #5 - Public Dialogue

At home together, my family and I talk together about situations that's been going around in the world. We usually talk about news that we read in the newspaper or in the internet and/or watched from television. Most of the time, we state some opinions about the situation. Such as we either agree or disagree or what they've could have done better or what we can do about it. Not too long ago, we read articles of the enormous Californian fires. This was of course a concern to my family because we have relatives that was surrounded by the fires. We called our relatives if they were safe and talked of what we can do to help them. For example, we talked about shelter.

Research

Today, me and Naomi researched further for more resources (articles) and started planning out and typing up annotations.

Brainstorming the Essay

Naomi will focus on being a Plantation owner (Bradford)while siding patriotism. Junalyn will be focusing on being a royal governor (Barton) while siding loyalism.

Structure and Organization:
The introduction will start with the relationship with the patriots and the loyalists (historical theme). For the essay, one side will start on one topic/issue/argument with explanations/commentary. The opposing side will argue against that argument in another paragraph with her explanations. The other argues against that so and so forth. Each paragraph will have its own color. The patriot's paragraphs will be in blue text and the loyalist's will be in red. At the end when we come up with a decision, we will make the text purple.

We will be using powerpoint presentations. Each paragraph will have a slide using pictures of evidence, facts, and stating our arguments. The patriot's slides will have a blue background and the loyalist's slides will be red.

Research:
Both of us will research on both sides. We will use the textbook and other resources like books.

Midterm Practice 2

Men are born equal by body and mind though their nature of life have the presence of conflicts. Men's state of nature means that they have the freedom to control themselves. They have the right to protect their properties and socially agree or disagree with others. This ideology comes from the chapter of men's state of nature by Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes then explains men joining to become as one whole known as the common-wealth. From the state of nature, men decides to follow the common-wealth as a benefit.

In the excerpt by Thomas Hobbes, the main issue explains why men decides to follow common-wealth or as one community with others. The excerpt explains how fear and necessity of men goes under with liberty in joining of the common-wealth. In joining of the common-wealth, men has to give up their liberties, their way of thinking of controlling themselves and follow, in agreement, the community's set of rules. Generally, it states that laws that are set by the common-wealth are to be followed legally. Also, "Liberty and Necessity are Consistent" (Hobbes). This means that men were willing to receive protection for their properties by the common-wealth. In the time of Hobbes' philosophy, men had the protection for land, slaves, etc.

The author's point of view of his philosophy states that men have a reason to join the common-wealth, not just for the equality with others but for their own desire. Men's desire is of course the protection of their properties. They wanted the common-wealth to protect their properties because it is one of the "tools" to defend others of obtaining their belongings. Hobbes' quoted,"because every act of man's [sic] will, and every desire, and inclination proceeds [sic] from some cause, and that form another cause, in a continual [sic] chain [sic], [...] they proceed from necessity." Going back to Hobbes' philosophy of men's state of nature, men often conflict with others because their greediness of gaining more properties from others. This relates to the concept of competition which the reason why men joins the common-wealth. The common-wealth doesn't mean they are the competition, but joining the common-wealth decrease the tensions of competition. The community serves as the protection because anyone who doesn't follow the rules set by the community, will be judged. This was a better way for property owners because only the community gets involved in it.

In my point of view, I agree with Hobbes' excerpt. Men who isolates themselves as one ruling body, has the freedom to do whatever they want. People involved in the common-wealth, in relation to government,

Essay#1 Reflection

How do you think you did?
I think I didn't do well in performance. I waited until the last minute to finish up the outline, rough drafts, and the final. I didn't use time wisely because I did not use the spare time after school and I didn't used the whole day of Thursday of working on it. Sometimes I procrastinate or I was busy with other work...so I have problems with time management. I agree with the grade I was given and I think I deserved it. My essay should have been better if I spend time on working on it. Other than my performance on working on the essay, I honestly thought I did my best on it. I followed most of my high school teacher's instructions (ex: connection with topic sentences). But I guess that was high school and this is a college essay...

What have you learned about your
...writing process?
I know that I did a sloppy job on the outline, but I went back to the outline to make it better. I learned that I put the essay aside and did other homework first instead. And when "I had the time" to do the essay, I also did the rough drafts sloppy (thinking that I would revise and edit it later for a better final draft). When I did the final essay (last minute), I did not look back to revise and edit to make the essay flow better, instead I skimmed for spellchecking and parenthetical citations.

...writing philosophy?
Before I began to write the outline, I didn't have trouble finding the topic I want to write about. I found many useful and reliable information, than other themes, that I can write about. When I wrote the outline, I tried to avoid using "pidgin" in school papers, but I had some problems with "verb tense." I didn't think thoroughly about the topic which made my outline sloppy (with irrelevant information). Since the essay was argumentative, I look back to the article "They Say/I Say" for some tips to argue for my topic and I used some templates.

What have you learned about college writing vs. high school writing?
Although I didn't turn in my essay late, I learned that if we turn in our homework late we'll have a "NP" and its not acceptable (based on the syllabus). In high school, teachers accept work late with a late notice of an excuse.

What changes will you make for next time?
I definitely want to change my poor time management. I want to spend time wisely on upcoming essays. So I can plan my outline better and spend more time on revising and editing.

AOD Blog #4 - Evaluation and Reflection

In less than a week before History's midterm, I have been studying to get ready for the big test. I went through powerpoint notes and the textbook to study some of the questions of the study guide. Though studying the notes won't help me figure out my strengths and weaknesses of my knowledge of history. Until then, I found a website from the textbook (bedfordstmartins.com/roark). The website consists of summaries of each sections of the chapters. This have helped me have a better understanding of history. Also that website have mini quiz which I can test my knowledge of what we learned. Each chapter has several quizzes of info and terminology. This helped me a lot because the scores of the quizzes helped me know what information I need to know and remember for the test (some info from the website may or may not be based on the Ben's study guide). For example, if I had a bad score on one of the quizzes, I would study more on that section.

Final Draft - Bacon's Rebellion and Class

Bob Marley quotes, “Open your eyes and look within. Are you satisfied with the life you’re livin’” (http://www.uvm.edu/~debate/dreadlibrary/skowera. html)? His quote targets the gap between social classes in the Chesapeake colonies especially the lower class. The lower class was not pleased with the inequalities between them and the higher class. The social gap of the British colonists led to one of the most important event of American history, Bacon’s Rebellion. Bacon’s Rebellion was led by Nathaniel Bacon in the 1670s, which he supported the lower class (The American Promise 92). Bacon’s decision to revolt for the lower class was justified.

Similar to countries like India, Chesapeake colonies followed the caste system. The caste system is a social hierarchy in which people inherit positions and rights by birth from older generations. The caste system rank status based on their wealth or the wealth of older generations. This is related to the society of the Chesapeake colonies. For example, “Virginia pivoted from a colony of rather aimless adventurers into a society of tobacco planters” (The American Promise 80). Chesapeake colonies were known as the tobacco society because it was the major export. Whoever owns crops were making big profit from their export. They were known as elite planters or yeoman planters. In other words, they were considered as the higher class. When Chesapeake colonies were economically growing, planters wanted more hands to work on their tobacco or other commodity crops. This was the start of class distinction between the planters and the lower class. English immigrants served as indentured servants with a contract of four to seven years. After their contract expired, servants became freed servants or landless colonists (The American Promise 80-85). Although they moved up a status, they were still in the lower class. The social gap between planters and freed servants led to the battle between Nathaniel Bacon and William Berkeley with other government officials.

The inequality between the wealthy and the poor classes affected Nathaniel Bacon’s to promote a rebellion. Robert Beverley wrote the history of Bacon’s rebellion in 1704 and he was also in the account of the rebellion. According to Beverley, Nathaniel Bacon “had been brought up at one of the Inns of court in England, and had a moderate fortune” (“On Bacon’s Rebellion, 1704”). In other words, Bacon didn’t come from the lower class, but Bacon sympathized the lower class settlers’ inequality with the planters and government officials. The planters and the government officials were recognized as the higher, wealthy class. Although The American Promise, may object the inequality between the classes because it states that “colonists […] accepted social hierarchy and inequality as long as they believed government officials ruled for the general good” (89). William Berkeley, as Virginia’s governor, thought he followed the government for the greater good. Berkeley claims that he “doe not know of any thing relative to this Country wherein [he] have acted unjustly, corruptly, or negligently in distributing equall Justice to all men” (“On Bacon’s Rebellion,” William Berkeley). Bacon and the lower class considered Berkeley’s statement inaccurate. Therefore, Bacon argues that the elites and the government officials “raised greate unjust taxes upon the Comonality for the advancement of private favorites” (“Declaration in the Name of the People,” Nathaniel Bacon). Agreeing with Bacon, the elites and Berkeley contradicted themselves. They showed unfairness towards the lower class because they raised taxes for their private gain of wealth. In his article, Robert Beverley maintains that “taxes […] fell heaviest on the poor people, the effect whose labor would not clothe their wives and children” ("On Bacon’s Rebellion, 1704”). His point states that the taxes burdened the poor because they cannot afford the expectations of the higher class.

Other than the inequality of taxes, attaining properties was also the cause of Bacon’s Rebellion. The landless colonists immigrated to Chesapeake colonies to purchase land and have the opportunity to become prosperous. In reaching their goal, the poor encroached on Native American land to build up their own crops of tobacco or other commodity (The American Promise 84-92). Landless colonists had to encroach because there was no sufficient amount of land to purchase in the colonies. This also influenced Bacon to support the lower class to achieve their goal. Though I disagree with their decision to invade and gain Indian land because they violated the agreement between Native Americans and colonists. The treaty states that “to minimize contact between settlers and Indians and thereby maintain peace” (The American Promise 92). The treaty was decided by the Indians and the governmental officials. English colonists had to stay within the colonies and the Indians stay on their own land. In other words, settlers can not encroach on Indian land. However, the landless colonists did encroach on Native American land. The lower class disobeyed the colonial government’s treaty due to their inequality (The American Promise 92). Though, I agree with Bacon’s and the colonists’ decision to encroach. The poor class needed to provide their crops for survival and to become wealthy.

With the help from Bacon in the rebellion, the resolution affected the Chesapeake society. Government officials decided that it would be safer to fight with the Indians and did little to prevent settlers in encroaching Indian’s land (The American Promise 93). This lessened the pressure between the elite and the poor. In my opinion, I disagree with their decision to fight with the Indians for land, but it benefited the lower class with wealth. Landless colonists can reach their goal to build up their crops and support themselves. Also, the King of England approved Bacon’s Law. The law was made by Bacon when he was elected as a burgess in 1676. Bacon’s law “gave local settlers a voice in setting tax levies, forbade office holders from demanding bribes, or other extra fees for carrying out their duties, and restored the vote to all free men” (The American Promise 93). Bacon passed this law to reform Chesapeake into equality during the rebellion. After the rebellion, the King’s approval shaped Chesapeake society into equality between the classes. The reduction of indentured servants turned Chesapeake colonies into a slave labor system by using enslaved Africans (The American Promise 97). Both lower and higher classes had little difference between them since then they were considered as superior whites.

The social hierarchy of the Chesapeake society relates to the society of American life today. In relation, American life today consists of inequality by class. America is a diverse country which the complexity of classes differ by education, wealth, income, and profession. Also, citizens inherit their class by birth. Though, Americans have the right of choice to move up to a higher or lower social status. Social status in the U.S. would not be an issue like Bacon’s Rebellion, but there is discrimination between classes. In American culture, high schools are composed of ranks of popularity (which makes high school a heterogeneous mixture). High school students get along with their “same kind” or cliques by sharing the same interests. Also, students judge each other by what they’re wearing which they think it will determine the student’s wealth and where they live. For example, a student wearing out-of-style clothes would be judged as a person who cannot afford to buy new clothes. Stereotypically, sometimes students hang out with others who have the same level of education. Such as grade point averages. High school is basically the competition between cliques of superiority.

Social hierarchy was one of the primary causes of Bacon’s Rebellion in American history. Differences between classes were a major effect in the colonies. The effect led to the cause of the rebellion and how it set a role of reformation which in turn, the rebellion helped the satisfaction of life the classes wanted. The social status of then and today tries to strengthen, like India, to become as equal and to have the right to improve life as one pleases.

AOD Blog #3 - Mentoring

My family (my parents and my younger sister) gets involved in mentoring with each other. We teach and guide together from school work to real world life. In Key Club, I tutored elementary kids with their school work. But before I tutored the students, I helped my younger sister with her projects and math (and I still help now). I am more comfortable tutoring math because I think I'm strong in mathematics than other subjects. Though there are no tutoring offered from their school, I'm looking forward to tutor anyone. Though sometimes I myself gets stuck in homework especially language arts homework. My parents usually help me revise, edit, and they gave helpful advices into creating a piece of writing. Other than education mentoring, my parents teaches and guides me and my sister to live an independent life in the real world. My parents taught us basic things we need to know how we should live in our homes independently. For example, they taught us how to clean up the house. Also, my parents taught us how to cook Filipino food, which we hope to preserve Filipino culture. They hold conversations with me and my sister about their mistakes and how to resolve and avoid them. For instance, they taught us the steps to buy and sell houses. My parents taught us these tips because they don't want to see us repeat their mistakes.

Rough Draft #2

Bacon’s Rebellion & Class

“Open your eyes and look within. Are you satisfied with the life you're livin'?" (http://www.uvm.edu/~debate/dreadlibrary/skowera.html). This quote by Bob Marley is true to the social gap between social classes especially the lower class. The social gap between the British colonists led to one of the most important event of American History, Bacon’s rebellion. Bacon’s Rebellion was led by Nathaniel Bacon in which he supported the lower class. I agree with Bacon’s decision into rebelling for the lower class because of the class distinction of inequality and land which effectively improved the Chesapeake society in resolution and how it affects American life today.

Similar to developing nations like Pakistan , Chesapeake colonies followed the caste system. The caste system is a social hierarchy in which people inherit positions and rights by birth from older generations. The caste system range from lower to higher status based on their wealth or the wealth of older generations. This is related to the society of the Chesapeake colonies. For example, “Virginia pivoted from a colony of rather aimless adventurers into a society of tobacco planters” (“The American Promise” 80). Chesapeake colonies were considered as the tobacco society because it was the major export. Whoever owns crops were making big profit from their export and they were considered in the higher class. They were known as elite planters or yeoman planters. When Chesapeake colonies were economically growing, planters wanted more hands to work on their tobacco or other commodity crops. This was the start of class distinctions between the planters and the lower class. English immigrants served as indentured servants with a contract of four to seven years. After their contract expired, servants became landless colonists or freed servants. Still, they were in the lower class. The social gap between planters and freed servants led to the battle between Nathaniel Bacon and William Berkeley or other government officials (“The American Promise”).

The inequality between the wealthy and poor classes affected Nathaniel Bacon’s to promote a rebellion. According to Robert Beverley, Nathaniel Bacon “had been brought up at one of the Inns of court in England, and had a moderate fortune” (“On Bacon’s Rebellion, Robert Beverley). In other words, Bacon didn’t come from the lower class, but Bacon sympathized the lower class settlers’ inequality with the elites and government officials. Although “The American Promise” may object the inequality between the classes because it states that “colonists…accepted social hierarchy and inequality as long as they believed government officials ruled for the general good” (89). William Berkeley, who was Virginia’s governor, thought he followed the government excellently. William Berkeley claims that he “doe not know of anything relative to this country wherein I [he] have acted unjustly, corruptly, or negligently in distributed equall Justice to all men” (“On bacon’s Rebellion”, William Berkeley). Bacon argues that the elite and government officials “raised greate unjust taxes upon the commonality for the advancement of private favorites” and the government officials, also the grandees, “abused and rendred contemptable the Magistrates of Justice” (Declaration of the of the Name of the People, Nathaniel Bacon). I agree with Bacon because the grandees, or elites, and the supporter, William Berkeley contradicted themselves. They were unequal because they raised taxes for their private gain of wealth. In his article, Robert Beverley maintains that “taxes…fell heaviest on the poor people, the effect of whose labor would not clothe their wives and children” (“On Bacon’s Rebellion”). His point was that the taxes that burdened the poor because they can not afford the taxes.

Other than the inequality of taxes, attaining properties were also the cause of the start of the Bacon’s Rebellion. In reaching their goal into a higher status, the lower class encroached on Indian lands to build up their own crops of tobacco or other major exports. This also influenced Nathaniel Bacon to support the lower class to achieve their goal. Although I disagree with their decision to invade and gain Native American land because they violated the agreement between Native Americans and colonists. The treaty states that “to minimize contact between settlers and Indians and thereby maintain peace” (“The American Promise”). This means that English colonists stay in their colonies and the Indians stay in their own land. Also, settlers can not encroach on Indian land. In social hierarchy, the lower class disobeyed the colonial government’s treaty and they encroached on Indian lands for owning properties. Though, I agree their decision into encroaching onto Native American’s land. Landless colonists need to provide their crops for survival. Recently freed indentured servants mean they have the opportunity to become rich. Freemen wanted to move up from their lower status to a higher one.

With the help from Bacon in the rebellion, it had affected the Chesapeake society. Government officials decided that it would be sager to fight with the Indians and did little to stop settlers in encroaching Indian’s land (“The American Promise”). This lessened the pressure between the elite and the poor. In my opinion, I disagree with their decision to fight with the Indians, though it had benefited the lower class. Landless colonists can reach their goal to build up their crops and support themselves. Both lower and higher classes had little difference between them since then they were considered as superior whites.

The social hierarchy of the Chesapeake society relates to the social hierarchy of American life today. In relation, American life today consists of inequality. America is diverse country and classes are complex that they can be split by education, wealth, and income. Also, citizens inherit their class by birth. Though, Americans have the right of choice to move up to a higher or lower social status. For example, immigrants move to America for a better life. Some end up in lower class jobs with low income. My great-grandfather immigrated to Hawaii and worked on sugarcane and pineapple fields. He also worked for a contract like the indentured servants. He lived in poor conditions. Unfortunately, he didn’t own any land in Hawaii. Until later, his son or my grandfather own property.