* What is the greatest challenge facing your generation? What will be necessary to address it?
The greatest challenge facing our generation is probably.. well, I can think of two things. One, the lack of resources, seeing as water is becoming a rarity. Two, the switch to the internet and having more entertainment out there that decreases creative productivity. For the first problem, there really isn't much we can do as an individual. I know there is the saying, "An individual can make a difference" and they talk about people like Martin Luther King Jr. and JFK, but they had opportunities. I suppose that is how we can change the course of this generation. By having people take advantage of different opportunities, it brings forth action towards a cause which is all we really need now. I just learned from Shanna's practice TPOL that recycling plastic helps but not as much as we'd want it to since it doesn't recycle to new bottles that get later circulated, it recycles to plastic porches and things that aren't often bought.

As for the second problem, we can only educate people about the difference in the a computer. Many kids don't know the aspect of making a video game, they just play it. But they have the potential to make one and come up with an idea for it. We can take an action like playing video games and turn it into something that will benefit the rest of the world.I'm actually sort of on the fence about technology. It's like a double edged sword, we'd have to see if it's more beneficial to have it then to not.

* Beyond grades, what motivates you to work hard at school? * Describe your vision for yourself in pursuing higher education.
There are two questions, but I'm putting them in the same paragraph since they sort of relate. First of all, I work hard in school for two reasons. It's reasonable to get good grades, as in it's not horribly hard to get good grades, it's just something you put in time. However, it is a positive influence to both your knowledge and how the outer world looks at you. The second thing that motivates me to do good in school is the pursuit of knowledge behind experience. As we know from reading Kurt Vonngut's word, not everyone knows everything about a situation. The only way we proceed in life is by knowing things. To know something in photoshop, to know how to be a confident speaker, to know how to touch the lives of other people. Simply by knowing things, you can go very far in the progress you want to make.

This ties into my vision of pursuing a higher education. More then anything I want to know what people think. In the future, I want to be an animator. An animator makes work for other people meaning you have to appeal to other people. By knowing different sorts of people, it's easier to find a connection thread in knowing what sort of animated movies people like to see. By pursuing this information, I can make a movie that a lot of people like. For those who don't like it, at least they could respect that it's a creative idea, which is also a good feeling to leave a watcher with. It's also good to know how to do things. For example, in college, they teach you how to do things. You learn about computer programs, talking to people, how so-and-so works, how to do this. By owning these skills, you can produce work effectively and efficiently. There is the saying "time is money" in the future, it is.

* What is a quality in a classmate that you would like to develop in yourself?
This is not so much a classmate, but more of an adult. One quality I would like to develop is relating with other people. I'm relatively good at that already, or at least I can understand the stand points of other people. But when Larry, the CEO of HTH, came to talk to us about our Ampersand pieces, I was blown away at how much he related to everyone. He's had so much experience doing things and meeting people. In the future, I would love to have those sort of stories. I want to speak publicly and relate with my audience in a way that they leave the conversation thinking, "Wow, that was a cool person" like how I felt when Larry left. I think just taking advantage of your opportunities and gaining experience to connect with other people is the best thing in the world. That way, your opinion goes farther.

Describe one valuable mistake you made this year.

The mistake I made was in the first semester and it was working too hard. I was at the point where all I did was go home, do homework, and sleep. It wasn't enjoyable but I thought it was one of those things where I was like, "Well, what else would I do with my time." By working hard, yes, I did create beautiful products, but I wasn't personally content with the level I was giving out. I was especially frustrated when I was working "this" hard and I felt as if other people did not match my level. The reason this experience was valuable was because I learned to delegate energy. Instead of focusing all my energy on making a project that was going to be amazing already, I exerted more of it to communicating with my peers in group projects. I focused more on what kind of ideas they had. Also, I didn't take it upon myself to do all the work. I had a lot more free time and I feel as if I easily focused on doing better work versus just "more" work. Another positive aspect that came from this was helping other people. Instead of being infatuated with my own learning, I found it valuable to teach other people because it questioned how well I knew what I was teaching.

What is your greatest strength as a student in a project-based learning environment?
The greatest strength I have is getting things done. I do not procrastinate on my work and make sure it's in a self accepting quality that I would be somewhat proud of. When it comes to projects, planning in advance is always important because it is a large amount of work in a set amount of time. I mentally map out a plan in my head to get things done at certain times. Now, I'm not one to keep track of dates like "get step one done on May 25th", I'm more of a, "I will accomplish the following aspects of my project so I will have less of it later on." This has helped me make work that isn't rushed. Also, when I'm in group projects I do relatively well. If I'm absent, I make sure to email the person with a list of things that need to get done off the top of my head. I am good at adding suggestions but not dominating a project.

What challenges do you face as a student in a project-based learning environment?
I touched a little on this earlier. There comes a time when I feel as if students aren't working on the same caliber as me of are not putting the same amount of time into working as I am. This appears frustrating to me because in the eyes of a teacher, it's a group. We have to accomplish something together and make it look like it's together. With everyone on a different level of communication, it is fairly difficult to get the simplest tasks done. Sometimes, actually quite often, I think, "This will just be faster and convenient if I do it." After all, I am a person that runs with things based on it's efficiency and convenience. It is also hard to see someone working slowly on something. For example, I work quickly in Photoshop since I know Photoshop well. I'm computer literate in digital art programs so when I see someone working on something slowly when there is an easy and quick way to finish it, that also agitates me. With the amount of resources that are availible to us, I think I get a bit frustrated working with people with a different work ethic then me. But that's no surprise, that's something hard to work with in general.

1. One thing that I know I've improved on is not using sledgehammer words. I use to have a hard time with this. I still use it in my physical speech, which I'm trying to get rid of, but I know I've tried to take it out of my writing. It's one of those words that fill up exaggeration. Instead of saying a simple sentence like, "I want some ice cream," I've made a habit of saying, "I really want some ice cream."

An example of my use of sledgehammer words in my previous writing was in my Great Gatsby essay. Looking back on it, I liked to add quite a bit of "really's" in my paper. When I read through it, I found sentences like, "There wasn't really a creative way of becoming rich, no individualism or personality in achievement, thus branding the American Dream as uncreative and hollow," and "Even with his success, he never really made close friends." I think this was from my final draft too, the one I turned in to be graded.

In Ampersand, I kept an eye out for the sledgehammer words in my essay. When it came to this project, I had a lot of rough drafts. As a matter of fact, here is a screen shot of the folder where I kept all of my Ampersand related files.

When it came to my first draft, I just wrote out all my ideas. Instinctively, I used the word really quite a bit and that draft looked nothing like my current. I was solely focused on, "Internship was a really good experience for me." which was lacking in the professional and specific department. When I was writing the actual rough draft I was going to turn in, I wrote something like, "Not really wanting to accomplish work."

I was still working out through my own ideas. Instead of using the sentence, I used the idea and compared it to my own experience. I felt strong about this idea and it didn't really cut it as one sentence. If I had kept the sentence, I would've just replaced the word "really" with "immensely" or some other longer looking sledgehammer word. In my third draft, I wrote, "There is really only one way to pass this step." which was later edited out due to irrelevance. In the end, I accomplished my final Ampersand piece with no "really's" at all. This is one of the improvements that I made that I was particularly proud of.

2. I would personally like to improve my use of the loop. The first time I used it was... I'm not sure actually. I did use a bit of it before we even learned about it. It tried doing it for my American Icons project. The only problem with that was that it was unclear. It was explaining how when critiquing your art, you get better and better. In the beginning, I mentioned things about a sketch. Then near the end, I mention a sketch again, but skew it in the direction of a better sketch. However, that was unclear.

The second time I used the loop was in my Great Gatsby Essay. This one was a little tricky though. In the first paragraph, I was talking about how, "the American Dream was typically about wealth, titles, and showmanship." In the second to last paragraph, I tried linking back to that idea why evaluating it further. I said, "Since money was the language of society, Gatsby used money to talk to society." I attempted to use the loop, but at that point, I was still confused about how it worked. I'll be honest, I had no idea how to use it on the first essay I wrote using that method. I remember asking Randy a lot of questions since I was trying to link the loop back to math, but it didn't work out so well. I wasn't able to rate my thoughts by the connections I made, if that makes any sense. My main problem was that my ideas were all over the place because I made connections too soon or too late. Instead of making a loop, I sort of make a wave right now. I suppose that's just how I think about things. I hope to improve on this for the future.

History Reflection

1. The person I would've been interested to run into it probably Franklin D. Roosevelt. One, I would've probably felt awkward. I mean, he was in a wheelchair, that can say a lot about his character. If he were our age, you wouldn't probably thought he broke something while playing sports or he got into this horrible accident. Most people would feel a little awkward when approaching him. Even so, I would probably be interested in his story and ambitions for the future. I would imagine him to be a leader. Maybe of some sort of club, something to do with the world. He loved to move people in my opinion, especially if he feels strongly about something.

2. “Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”
A quote from his first inaugural address. This is something that stood out to me because this is something that would work in even present day situations. It's one of those philosophies that just doesn't die because it applies to all generations.

"The first is freedom of speech and expression-everywhere in the world. The second freedom is every person to worship God in his own way-everywhere in the world. The third is freedom from want, which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants-everywhere in the world"

Loved this quote from him. I think this is something I would question the most, actually. I was wondering how he got the ideas of these freedoms. What was the thought process he went through when thinking of these? How did he deal with people thinking of loopholes in his speeches? What sort of troubles did he encounter by proposing these?

"I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire."

I think this was one of the quotes where I thought he was confident. I would've liked to see how he would deal with people in college. He was a leader, definitely, but would he also have the same confidence to talk to fellow peers? When he doesn't have the power of the president back then, I wonder how he'd establish his authority. Overall, the only reason I'd bring him here is to learn about the history and his experience. For example, when he was a kid, his thoughts on the current president.

3. I chose this person just because it would be kind of interesting to see how he was, first of all, back then, and second of all, meeting my mind set which is the mindset of a world of technology and stuff like that. I'm pretty sure internet over the years have skewed the thinking of all sorts of people. I would've wanted to see how he would cope with that since, personally, I feel as if people are influences by the wrong things everyday. How would he make his stance stand out? How would he speak out to a collapsing world?

I also chose FDR because of his affect to his community in his time. I mean, he was the president. He was in a situation where the president before him had an opposite way of dealing with the Great Depression. I personally wonder how he got the support of so many people. How must it have felt to have the whole world resting on your shoulders? He had some huge decisions to make. In history, it sounds all too easy. I wonder how he must've felt after vetoing a bill or speaking out the the public. Was he very confident? Did he ever think twice about something? How was his personality aside from being president?

4. Franklin D. Roosevelt, Inaugural Address, March 4, 1933, as published in Samuel Rosenman, ed., The Public Papers of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Volume Two: The Year of Crisis, 1933 (New York: Random House, 1938), 11–16. (Found at http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5057/)

http://americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fdrthefourfreedoms.htm

http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/fdr-infamy.htm

Who I'd bring to college with me

If I could bring one character from any book with me to college it would be Kurt Vonnegut. His words, observations, and philosophy intrigues me with its skillful critique of life. I think he would be better as a roommate since I'm still the kind of person to talk about pointless things, I don't think I could keep up with him intellectually all the time. Also, hearing his views may tire me out so I think a roommate is perfect. He would still be a friend, but he wouldn't be a super close friend, the type I would talk about gossip to.

The reason why I'd choose him is because, first of all, his philosophy on life. He can see all sorts of things in all different perspectives. I think that's increasingly interesting because at least you know he isn't incredibly bias. He shows his opinion of life through other characters, I think that's a good way of saying, "This is my opinion, it's not a fact, it's a opinion from different people." That personally reminds me of myself. I'm the sort of person to compare my perspectives to other things. I don't compare to the majority, I compare it to examples of the world. Maybe like characters that I make up. I mean, I enjoy comparing ideas to other similar ideas, sometimes that may seem unrelated like Kurt Vonnegut comparing war and aliens.

I think overall, he would've been an interesting person to talk to about anything. He's one of those people who question things, but he doesn't just question them, he finds some sort of explanation for it. Overall, having your opinions questioned and given suggestions helps develop your thought process, which is a key goal of mine.

Mock Trial Questions

So, since I wasn't in the trial for the last two days, I missed out on a lot. I was left with many questions. One of the questions was what did the witnesses think about the opposing side? For example, when Lupe was up as a witness, she sounded very bias and to me, I felt a little like it was because she had first hand experience of immigration. Even so, she didn't look like she considered the view of the opposing side which I thought was sort of one sided argument.

Another question I had was the witnesses on the defense. I wasn't around to see it, so I really had no idea how the defense was.. well, defending themselves. The only reasons I have now was that they were truing to "protect" their citizens. I read a few blogs from other people and some were talking about how they were taking jobs away from the citizens of Arizona. Was this a point that was brought up in the trial?

Also, there was a few references to prejudices in America like how one of the founding fathers owned slaves. I wanted to know if the trial ever got into that topic because immense skills in connecting things would've been needed. I was personally confused the first time it was brought up. How I envisioned it, the defense would've picked at it and questioned the witnesses of the prosecution to tear apart that argument. Honestly, that probably would've helped the defense more, it would be something that could've perhaps confused the prosecution and made them think twice about who they brought to the stand.

Another question I had was what were some specific events that occurred? How I heard it, there was something about how someone looked like an immigrant and was called out for it. In my perspective, it looks like it has a clear cut answer that it is unjust and unfair. It appears to fall in line with stereotypes and prejudices.

Anyway, I may be rambling, but I thought the prosecution was pretty well organized. From the start, they read the Amendments which was probably one of the best pieces of evidence. I also had the question of how did they support their argument that the Arizona bill was unjust? Did they use examples that compared and contrasted? I would've liked to hear something like, "If blah blah was here, would this person get the same rights?" and have one of those metaphors that really made you think. I think that would've really confused the defense.

Unfortunately, I wasn't there for most of it so I honestly didn't know how it went. I do know the prosecution won, I would've found it a little confusing if the defense won. Even from the limited amount of my knowledge to the case, there was definitely more legal reasoning behind the prosecution then the defense.

Mock trial

Keep in mind I was gone for two days and didn't really get to ask the questions I wanted to. I would've liked to see the new trial.

1. Summarize the facts of the case, as presented by the prosecution. Include relevant witnesses and testimony.
If I remember correctly, I think it was something about the prosecutions again the Arizona law because the law was going against the US Constitution. Basically, they were talking a lot about the amendments like how people have the right to a fair trial. There was also some information that went into illegal immigrants and whether or not what they did on "American soil" still guaranteed them the rights that are in the Constitution, even if they were illegal. I was in the Jury and remembered Calvin asking about what I thought about the distribution of rights and who are allowed the rights in the Constitution. He was looking for jury members who believed in fair rights for illegal immigrants. It think the people who wrote the constitution was brought up, one was James Madison and the other.. I can't remember. Lupe also went up there talking about her experience.

2. Summarize the facts of the case, as presented by the defense. Include relevant witnesses and testimony.
I don't remember much of the defense since I was there only one day and what they were talking about was a bit unclear. I think they were playing a safe card though and went with the whole, "We just want to protect the citizens of Arizona from illegal immigrants because they raise the crime rate." Then they went on to saying how the Constitution was only talking about the rights of citizens and not "illegal aliens". They were defending themselves by saying they were just doing their job.

3. What was the most significant piece of evidence, in your personal opinion?
I was most interested in the bringing up of amendments. It was intriguing to see the connections and how they are really used in court cases. I mean, to us it's just like, "Right to a fair trail" so we sort of brush that off. But for illegal immigrants, that could be a huge life changing amendment that they would want to possible have. This piece of evidence made me think about, "Oh, it is on American soil, does that even count?" It's sort of like when there is something that's on the fence, does it count or doesn't it. To think, hundreds of people's lives could be effected by the decision of giving them rights since they are in the US or not giving them those rights at all.

4. What was the most significant argument made, in your opinion?
I think I remember hearing this as an evaluation (I didn't really pick this up until someone sort of pointed it out to me) but it was something about how Arizona really had no power to pass bills that were against the Constitution. The most defensive argument I heard from Arizona was that they just wanted the citizens to be safe but the prosecution basically told them they were going at it the wrong way and violated the Constitution which was not in their line of change.

5. What do you personally believe the correct verdict should be? Do you agree with the jury? Why or why not?
I was on the jury so I wasn't quite sure what was decided. Personally, I completely support the prosecution, the verdict was guilty. I didn't stick round for the second half, so I don't know what other evidence the defense had (I didn't get to hear from their witnesses) but as I heard it, I thought Arizona looked pretty guilty. They questioned so many amendments and they didn't have a clear answer to their attack on the Constitution. It sort of sounded like, "Oh well... we were protecting people! Come on, we were doing that.. right?" I also remember Calvin being a great lawyer with his confidence and his quick fact connections that was helpful when you were trying to connect ideas to the trial.