Sample Theses and Topic Sentences from Past Finals

SAMPLE THESIS STATEMENTS:

1) Each major assignment allowed me to develop and practice related but slightly different skills. The first paper helped me develop my storytelling appeals and critical reflection. The second helped me develop my critical thinking and analysis, while the third aided in the development of my research skills.

2) I learned a few new things this semester but the most important skills I gained have to be how to analyze an argument or a piece of rhetoric, how to tailor my arguments to different audiences, and how to take other people’s viewpoints into consideration, even if I don’t always agree with them. This class also helped my confidence as a writer.

3) Writing is not my strong suit so each major paper assignment was something of a challenge for me. However, by overcoming these challenges, each paper had its own rewards.

4) While a lot of the material covered in this class was introduced to me in high school classes, this semester gave me the opportunity to fine-tune my writing style through practice in critical thinking, analysis, citation, research, and logical argumentation.

5) There are things that I liked about this class (like conferences, being able to pick my own topics, and the laid back atmosphere), as well as some things I disliked (I’m not a fan of group work or research). Overall, though, I think I am a better writer now than I was a few months ago.



SAMPLE TOPIC SENTENCES:

1) This first paper, a Memoir, surprised and challenged me in a few ways. [The writer goes on to highlight some the difficulties she had with the Memoir, as well as how the assignment was different from what she expected in a college English course.]

2) The journal assignments were the easiest but also the most beneficial for me. [The writer then talks about what she liked about and gained from the journal assignments.]

3) There are a few suggestions I would make for future assignments, especially the journals and the research paper. [After this, the writer goes on to offer some constructive criticism and highlight a few things he didn't like or didn't find helpful about journals and the research paper.]

4) I found the analysis portion of the class particularly difficult. [After this topic sentence, obviously, the writer devotes the rest of the paragraph to describing the difficulties he had with the analysis assignment, then a little about how he overcame them.]

5) My favorite part of the class and Meyerhofer's teaching style was his use of conferences. [The rest of the paragraph talks about the benefit of conferences and how my approach differed from instructors she had in high school, how it helped her confidence, etc.]

FINAL EXAM

Hey, folks. Well, it's been a fun semester! Here's your final exam.

*

For your final, please prepare a typed, two page, double-spaced reflection essay on the course. I'll mainly be looking for a thesis and topic sentences in this one. You can go through each assignment and say what you liked or disliked, what was easy or difficult, etc. Another option is to devote each paragraph to a particular skill you developed or improved. It doesn't all have to be positive; be polite, but feel free to offer any constructive criticism. You can also address the essay specifically to me; in other words, unlike other formal essays, you can use "you," so long as you mean me and not readers in general.

I will accept finals via email but please bear in mind that not all messages go through, so once again, make sure that you type a brief message in the body of the email so it doesn't go to Junk Mail instead. Otherwise, you can turn in a printed copy OR cut and paste your essay in the body of an email (instead of sending it as an attachment).

I'm going to try to get all Finals graded and posted the same day I receive them (yeah, I'm amazing). Also, I'll reply ("Got it" or "Thanks") to every final as soon as I get them. So if you don't hear back from me and/or you don't see your score by the next day, I didn't get it.

Reminder: for Section 48, your Final is due by Tuesday, December 14th at noon IN MY OFFICE. For Section 61, your Final is due by Friday, December 17th at noon IN MY OFFICE. Once again, my office is 246 in the Robert Bell Building.

I've enjoyed working with you! Take care and have a good break!

Conference times

Wednesday, Nov. 10

1:00 PM Trenton Childs
1:15 Jamie Childers
1:30 Christy Curtis
1:45 free
2:00 Kyle Naughton
2:15 Michael Russell

4:00 Dylan Miller
4:15 Doug Spegal

Thursday, Nov. 11
1:30 Clara Harmony Resler
1:45 free
2:00 Rebecca Badowski
2:15 free
2:30 Sarah Richard
2:45 free
3:00 Joel Hartung
3:15 Molly Bontrager
3:30 Brock Morphew
3:45 Aaron Hiller

Friday, Nov. 12th
noon Paul Price
12:15 free
12:30 Kali Litherland
12:45 Dan Dynes
1:00 Hannah Butzer
1:15 Brooke Arnett Holman
1:30 Jordan Masters
1:45 Gary Miller
2:00 Anthony Wall
2:15 Alyssa Emmerich

Monday, Nov. 15th
noon Taylor Shields
12:15 Jenna Schneider
12:30 Rayann Harrison
12:45 Ian Fox
1:00 Brooke Dillard
1:15 Natasha Bontrager
1:30 Nate Loudin
1:45 Melissa Wray
2:00 Alyssa Hofelt
2:15 Tabitha Reid
2:30 Cameron Samuels

4:15 Katie Kelly

5:00 Spenser Carlisle
5:15 Nick Thee
5:30 Dan Dynes
5:45 Alyssa Clark

Tuesday, Nov. 16th
1:30 Mallory Sims
1:45 Andrea Silverman
2:00 Laura Gorbett
2:15 Christian Turner
2:30 Mariah Picklesimer
2:45 Adam Strahan
3:00 Shelby Holsinger
3:15 Sara Solomon
3:30 Nick Franklin
3:45 Alan Gogins

Wednesday, Nov. 17th CLASS RESUMES, PAPER DUE

Sample Researched Argument Papers

Here are some sample Researched Argument papers from previous classes. Again, these aren't perfect, but all scored in the A to B range. Apologies for any screw-ups in formatting.


Profanity in the Classroom (SAMPLE PAPER 1)

"Do you bite your thumb at me, sir?" (Gordon). Many of the most prominent and brilliant minds throughout history were fluent in the profanity of their time. Hailed as one of the greatest playwrights of all time, Shakespeare’s works are scattered with obscenities and crude phrase. In recent years there has been increasing agitation about the role profanity plays in the classroom. Some educators have even lost their jobs as a result of the controversy. Many agree that the tide of cursing cannot be stemmed; one teacher from New Jersey stated in a news article that, “despite all the effort schools are making to eliminate students' use of profanity, I do not think it is going to stop. In fact, I'm sure it will only get worse” (Grossman par. 18). But, perhaps this is not such a terrible phenomenon. In a different approach to dealing with the issue, some professors have chosen to embrace the trend and incorporate it into their teaching strategy. It seems that they have found a unique solution to another frustrating education problem: impassive students and poor classroom participation.

Universities today are plagued with non-responsive and disinterested students. In frustration, Michelle Merwin, a psychology professor at the University of Tennessee at Martin discusses the unresponsiveness of her students in a recent online college journal. “I see disruptive students, sleeping students, unfocused, distracted students -- students who are disengaged. I have the urge to scream at the sea of impassive faces, ‘please care about something!’… Too often, disruption feels more welcome to me than the expressions of impassivity and boredom” (Merwin par. 2). Many sources knowledgeable on the matter suggest introducing entertainment and activities to the curriculum to encourage student engagement. However, this tactic can prove to be difficult in large or lecture-based classes. Professors must find a way to connect with their students verbally.

Any good presentation, whether it is a speech, lecture, or essay begins with an attention grabber, or hook: “a means of attracting the interest or attention [of an audience]” ("Hook"). English professor Stephen Sniderman, when questioned about his exploratory teaching techniques, stated, “My goal as a teacher is to get students to think, and if I thought it would help to say fuck in class, I would say it. And I do” (Harvey par. 4). It humanizes professors; Sniderman believes that profanity can be “used as a relaxation tactic in the classroom… [He thinks] a more relaxed vocabulary in the classroom helps ‘create a different atmosphere’” (par. 10). When a professor approaches communication in a way that students are very familiar and comfortable with, they are more likely to participate in discussions. “‘It sometimes loosens students up. It gets a laugh,’ [a] freshman… agreed, and said that not only would it generate a more comfortable environment for some students, but it also gets her to pay more attention [during class]” (par. 11-12). Students who are interested in the discussion and pay better attention to the material are more likely to perform better on assignments and exams as well as form stronger relationships with their instructors and classmates. Students at a Texas university recently undertook a research project to determine whether or not profanity can actually release stress. According to Professor Yehuda Baruch who was in charge of the study, “Swearing is used as a social phenomenon to reflect solidarity and enhance group cohesiveness or as a psychological phenomenon to release stress” (Stinton par. 7). Personally, he feels that using profanity doesn’t pose any threat to the social environment (par. 6). Graduate assistant Jen Ondomisi confirmed that, “Words are only words; their meanings stand behind the way they are used” (Harvey par. 7). This study was repeated at other institutions and all came to much the same conclusion. In England, the study was performed at the University of East Anglia and it concluded “that foul language creates a good team spirit, allows [students] to vent frustrations and cements relationships” (Stinton par. 5).

Unfortunately, numerous teaching professionals still adhere to the conservative code of banning all profanity from the learning environment. In a private blog, a professor discusses her view of profanity in the classroom: “Unlike some professors, I never use profanity when I’m teaching… I think it sets the wrong tone for mature, scholarly discussion” (“Tales from the Classroom IV: Profanity” par. 2). A similar view is held by Skip Barnett who teaches linguistics at Goshen College. “He said he has seen a general downward decline of language… ‘Culture has gotten a lot looser about profanity’” (Madden par. 6). While mature, scholarly discussion is the dream of all professors, they must first arouse their students to actually participate in discussions.

Many people are also concerned about the psychological effect that profanity can have on others. “Such profanity in the classroom… is upsetting to teachers and administrators…” (Grossman par. 19). Venise Grossman is an instructor who writes a weekly educational column. She is a strong proponent of banning all profanity from the realm of education. In a past column she wrote, “When a person swears, he runs the risk of offending others and of sounding ignorant. Swearing is a lazy language. Instead of selecting a profanity, a better idea would be to select a more specific noun or adjective” (par. 23). Stephen Sniderman, an English professor in Ohio disagrees. “‘I’ve learned that everything is offensive to somebody, and it's sort of pointless to worry about it too much,’ Sniderman said. ‘I am not going to purposely go out of my way to offend anybody, either. That's not my goal’” (Harvey par. 17). Senior Richelle Semko agreed saying, “If someone can't handle that language at the college level, there's a great lack of maturity” (par. 14-15).

In the end, it seems that use of profanity in the classroom is simply a personal preference. Both Sniderman and students polled at Iowa State University agreed that classroom profanity depends on “the professor, their teaching style and the situation” (Harvey par. 8) (Stinton par. 9-10). Used properly it can be very beneficial to the learning environment. Students can become more engaged in the material and discussions and, ultimately, perform better in the class. Stephanie Garrett, an undergraduate English student shared her philosophy on the matter with the students from Texas A&M University-Commerce who conducted the study of the link between stress relief and profanity use. “Swearing in the classroom is fine as long as it is used at the appropriate times. I think it does actually unify the student and teacher because it is something they feel they have in common. It, in some ways, puts them on the same level” (Stinton par. 11).

Profanity is not a mark of ignorance or incivility. Language, profanity included, is constantly evolving and many historically prominent figures embraced the culture of their time. Perhaps the problem truly lies in people’s inability and unwillingness to adapt to the evolution of this society. They see it as a problem that needs to be fixed – an infection that must be cured. Our culture is being purged of its creativity and spunk. According to Sniderman, “Teaching is performing, and it's so complex; it's so much there in the moment, and you're not in control of the situation fully. So, it's a lot of taking chances, taking risks” (Harvey par. 9). As children we are encouraged to take risks and explore, but often as adults we are reprimand and sometimes even penalized for taking chances. Teachers who choose to use profanity in the classroom are taking creative risks in order to get through to their students and ultimately achieve their original goal: to teach.

Works Cited
Gordon, Suzanne L. "The Elizabethan Insult." The Renaissance Faire Forget-Me-Knot. 2001. 7 Apr 2009 .

Grossman, Venise. "Cursing in the classroom is a problem that won't go away." Courier-Post 16 Dec 2004.7 Apr 2009. .

Harvey, Mandy. "Profanity in the classroom." The Jambar 3 June 2004.7 Apr 2009. .

"Hook." Answers.com. 2009. Answers Corporation. 7 Apr 2009 .

Madden, Melissa. "Say what? Profanity has become part of many teens' everyday language ." The Elkhart Truth Newspaper 19 May 2005.7 Apr 2009. .

Merwin, Michelle M. "Let sleeping students lie?: Using interpersonal activities to engage disengaged students." College Student Journal Mar 2002. Findarticles.com. 15 Apr 2009. .

Stinton, Marthe. "What the ****? Profanity releases stress." The East Texan Online 1 Nov 2007.7 Apr 2009. .

"Tales from the Classroom IV: Profanity." Apropos of Something. 17 Oct 2007. 7 Apr 2009 .



Renewable Energy, the New Energy? (SAMPLE PAPER 2)


Oil shortages may not break into the headlines as often as war or global warming, but this nonrenewable energy source is certain to run out sooner than we think. As one focuses on America, energy is of the same importance as the money that runs through our economy. Without it, our technology and infrastructure would come to a complete halt. This country may be decades, or even centuries away from being unable to import and drill for oil, but the need to begin generating our own energy is upon us. However, even if supplies last for a while, it is simply a smarter decision to go domestic for our energy in order to keep ourselves out of wars for oil. Lucky for us, America is slowly but surely expanding and testing the boundaries of domestic, renewable energy. Leading the way in this renewable race are the technologies of solar and wind energy.

As Americans, we rely on nearly 21 million barrels of crude oil each day just to run our country and keep our stock supplies at a safe level (Wikipedia, par. 9). This figure by itself can be alarming if one would realize how much money we spend day after day on a source we know will run dry. This is due to the fact that it is nonrenewable and takes millions of years to naturally be produced. With prices of crude oil hovering around fifty dollars per barrel at this time, the math simply shows that we spend over 1.1 billion dollars on oil per day. This may be the raw source which drives our vehicles and some other energy needs, but one cannot be content with indirectly paying other countries just to satisfy some of our energy needs.

The focus has been on our consumption of oil, but we burn more than just our wallets on other sources of dirty, nonrenewable energy. As the Energy Information Administration shows for the year 2006, and most recent years, the United States’ consumption of renewable energy as a whole does not come close to what we burn in the different types of fossil fuels. There are good reasons for this, if one is looking at the alternative energy argument from a pro fossil fuel side. With prices for coal and natural gas relatively low, it might be hard to put forth the money needed to initiate a green plan. Also, oil prices have declined rapidly in the past year, which seems to have put some in a more relaxed position, yet this will not always be the case.

People in the United States and other developed countries notice the cost of fossil fuels when they rise, but we can absorb more than a lot of developing countries. As Americans, we must treat these smaller countries as an example as to what could happen to us in the long run. No one knows exactly when coal and oil supplies will start to diminish, but as Altenergy.org discusses, the third world countries, like Cuba, have already started to revert back to older times with changes like horse-drawn carts instead of trucks, and oxen in place of tractors (par. 6). This may be at the extreme end of the spectrum, but it is still an excellent example of why we must better our energy use habits.

Getting over this cost difference is one thing we must eventually do. The initial prices of renewable energy may be more than what we spend on fossil fuels and other nonrenewable fuels, but in the long run it will pay off. Just the simple fact that we will have more independence from foreign countries, which control a majority of our energy supplies, is a pro in this debate. Another pro with fossil fuels that the author Heron makes, is the fact that the technology to use fossil fuels exists now. He goes on to say that this “makes their use immediate,” implying that other fuels are not as ready to be consumed. This may be true for technology concerning hydrogen propelled cars and other new-aged ideas, but the renewable energy sector is already being used in today’s world.

Fields full of solar panels and plains dotted with wind propellers can be see across the world today. With these two renewable sources of energy being the main focus of this paper, a more in depth look is required to see if these sources are even worth switching to. One has seen some of the broad pros and cons concerning the fossil fuels we as Americans consume today, but there are some facts about alternative energy that are not circulated as much as they should be. First, consider the source of energy that allows our food and plants to grow in great abundance. Solar energy is a step ahead in my opinion because it takes no refining and most countries could, in a sense, harvest it for at least some time out of the year.

However, there are some pitfalls to solar energy. The two main cons concern the cost of installation and amount of sunlight that an area receives (Altenergy.org, Solar par. 15). Many of us may have heard about the cost that comes with getting this ‘free’ energy. Just as with any other renewable energy source the cost will be more at first, but it can even itself out within as little as five years (Altenergy.org, Solar par. 16). A question that may arise in this paper is where America itself, or its individuals, might get this extra money in a struggling economy to invest in solar panels. The answer to that is that through the controversial stimulus package of 2009, “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will invest nearly $79 billion in renewable energy, energy efficiency and green transportation” (Dickerson, par. 5). This money can surely be spread out and used to improve our renewable technology and to continue using more of it to help our independence from foreign energy.

The second downside that people find with solar panels is the amount of sunlight a certain place receives. Focusing in on America, we have found one of the best spots in the world. The southwest corner of our country receives a large amount of sunlight with little to no clouds all year long. There are already some solar fields in place here which proves to the effectiveness of finding the correct location. However, this seems to be the only prime spot, because at other locations around the country, precipitation and storms would cause too much of a threat to any solar field.

A great point to solar power, that should be made in any energy debate is the use of photovoltaic solar power. As the Altenergy.org (par. 7 & 8) section on solar energy explains, photovoltaic solar power boils down to the fact that these types of cells (components of a solar panel) directly produce electricity and therefore have no moving parts. This seemingly puts solar power at the forefront of renewable energy because very little maintenance is required. Along with this, this photovoltaic power does not need to be used in large fields. As seen in today’s world, individuals are placing solar panels atop their houses to power their own electrical needs.

Using wind as energy has been around since man first constructed windmills and set sails. Since then, not much has changed except for the technology behind these practical uses of wind. This long history provides a big pro behind supporting wind energy such that the windmills have continually come closer and closer to excellent efficiency throughout the years. However, as with anything, there are a few cons that go along with this renewable source. The per unit electrical output is less than that of solar, which means that windmills would take up more land area in order to produce the same amount of electricity (Altenergy.org, Wind par. 10).

Like with solar fields and the sun, windmills can only be put where there is enough wind to make it cost effective. Yet once a place is found, the price is rather high to install and maintain a field of windmills. Nevertheless, there are benefits that help balance this out. Skilled jobs are provided in the areas around these windmill fields, and as Americans we can be assured that wind prices will never rise like those of oil (Altenergy.org, Wind par. 1). After a while these windmills could seemingly break even in cost once they produce enough energy to pay for themselves. And of course as time passes, the wind will never need to be imported, nor will it ever diminish.

As one can tell, solar and wind energy have been the main foci of this paper. There are however, numerous other renewable energy sources in use today but considering the pros, cons and my own opinion, these two cannot be beat. Looking throughout the Altenergy.org site, one can look through the pros and cons of these different renewable energy sources:

A good example of these other types is the fact Ball State itself will install a geothermal energy system over the coming years. Yet the kind of geothermal that Ball State will be using is the only effective type and it comes with a salty price tag which would take longer than solar to pay for itself. Another source of energy being considered is biomass; however the amount of land needed is large. Along with the energy output would not be worth the land that the biomass material used. When considering hydroelectric and wave energy, the term renewable is prominent here and it would not require many square miles because the rivers and oceans already control the areas. However there is a high level of maintenance and cost accompanying these two types. Another aspect which should be considered with these two is wildlife disturbance seeing as it disrupts rivers and disturbs the ocean floor. (Altenergy.org, Renewable Energy)

The simple point being made here is that solar and wind power come out on top when one looks at every angle of renewable energy sources. ClimateBiz supports this claim when they reported, “Much of the growth in non-hydro renewable energy generation was spurred by the wind and solar sectors, which increased in 2008 by a robust 51 percent and 36 percent, respectively” (par. 4). It is great enough that America is starting to use more renewable energy as time goes on, but if we are able to focus on the ones that work best, then we can truly take a step towards our energy independence.

We hear on the news all the time about skirmishes or wars that we are involved in, yet the real reasons why we are there may hide the fact that our ambition is driven by energy. We are tied up in countries that supply us with oil, one of our main energy sources for vehicles and power. This is just one of the numerous reasons why it is only practical that we, as Americans, need to invest in domestic, renewable energy. Among the different types of renewable energy, solar and wind power are among the leaders and have expanded in the past years. Even so, it is not nearly enough until we are able to become a truly free nation concerning our energy demands.


Works Cited
Altenergy.org, "Renewable Energy." Alternative Energy. Alternative Energy Institute. 14 Apr 2009 .

 
Altenergy.org, "Solar Energy." Alternative Energy. Alternative Energy Institute. 13 Apr 2009 .
 
Altenergy.org, "Transition Energy." Alternative Energy. Alternative Energy Institute. 8 Apr 2009 .
Altenergy.org, "Wind Energy." Alternative Energy. Alternative Energy Institute. 13 Apr 2009 < http://www.altenergy.org/renewables/wind.html>.
ClimateBiz, "Renewable Energy Generation Climbs in 2008, Fossil Fuels Dip." GreenBiz.com. 26 March 2009. Greener World Media, Inc.. 8 Apr 2009 .
Dickerson, Marla. "Stimulus package gives a boost to clean energy." Los Angeles Times. 18 Feb. 2009. LA Times. 13 Apr 2009 .
"Energy in the United States." Wikipedia.org. 27 March 2009. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.. 8 Apr 2009 .
Energy Information Administration (EIA), "Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government." Energy Information Administration. July 2008. EIA. 8 Apr 2009 .
Heron, S. "Pros & Cons of Fossil Fuels." eHow. 26 February 2009. eHow. 8 Apr 2009 .



Merit Pay: A Wrong Turn for the American Education System (SAMPLE PAPER 3)

There is no doubt that teachers, professors, and educators in America deserve more pay for their long, tedious hours they spend in the classrooms. However, there still exists many discrepancies concerning how to compensate teachers with higher pay. Currently, President Barack Obama is advocating a merit based pay system as part of his plan for reforming education in America. Merit pay associates higher salaries and bonuses with better performance in the classrooms. While the merit pay system does reflect signs of progress of much needed educational reform in America, it has several negative consequences. Merit pay results in particularly unfair situations for teachers and incorporates standardized testing along with multiple setbacks associated with standardized testing. In addition, one possible solution in place of merit pay is a plan which gives more responsibility of education to local governments and local communities instead of giving all of the power to the national government and the national community.

First of all, while opportunities for increased pay seem like the perfect plan for teachers to earn more and do more for the school and students, teachers will find that the merit pay system puts them in particularly unjust situations. If President Obama rewards individual schools with more money, there is a strong chance that this money would go directly to the upper tiers of that particular school such as the principal at a high school. For instance, such power given to an individual who is already in much control could lead to a dishonest path where the principle plays the “favoritism” game. Multiple surveys have in fact revealed that over half of the teachers in America that have been questioned believe that principals will reward loyalty over test scores (“Obama Challenges”). If situations like this arise, then the whole legitimacy of the merit pay system is basically compromised because teachers are not rewarded for higher quality work.

They could be compensated due to dishonest dealings in a dishonest school. Ultimately, this does not necessarily mean better educated individuals. If that teacher who is looked highly upon by the principle is in fact a bad teacher, then poorly educated students will emerge year after year.

Another unfair situation can be examined in the context of experienced educators who have put many years into their profession. Like any other career, the longer a person accumulates experience and does a good job usually results in a higher salary. However, if merit pay becomes a part of educational reform, then the very opposite could happen to teachers across America. Experienced teachers may not necessarily show strong test scores, through which merit pay is based, for a given time period, and as a result, their salaries would never increase like they are scheduled to. It is always possible that their salaries can go down as well.

Teachers have already expressed concerns about this saying that they view merit pay as “…an unraveling of job protection…” and “…unproven and incapable of fairly judging which teachers should earn raises” (“Good for Teachers?”). Teachers are already in situations considered highly unfair because of their low pay, yet they are an important influence on the younger generation. But this would make it even worse. As a result, merit pay might not reward service and dedication like most other careers do. It instead could leave the experienced educators in America fearful that their hard work throughout the years was ultimately useless.
Thirdly, a national initiative such as merit pay conducted by the U.S. Government results in a national means to monitor progress, which is through standardized testing. Standardized testing has many negative consequences such as causing educators to cheat and lie, especially when higher pay is on the line. In some of the most dishonest cases of merit pay associated with reform in the past, teachers have taken advantage of the system for increased rewards. One example can be taken from England in 1710 where a merit pay system was linked to students scores on exams over core subject areas. Unfortunately, the outcome was that “…teachers and administrators became obsessed with financial rewards and punishments…,” and “…teachers and administrators were tempted to falsify results, and many did” (“Squelches Teaching”). There is no reason why a similar situation like this could not happen in America. In fact, something extremely analogous did happen in 1969 when President Nixon issued a merit pay system called “performance contracting.” Under this system, the opportunity for more money made no changes in how students performed, and it caused teachers to alter scores and teach only material that would be covered on the tests (“Squelches Teaching”). What these examples show is that merit pay often times encourages lying and cheating. With such dishonesty included in the classroom, it is not too far off to think that the students under the dishonest teacher could turn out to be dishonest themselves.

Now, such cases of dishonesty are typically rare, but teaching to the test can have negative outcomes even when the teacher is not corrupt. Under the current system of education, teachers are already pressured by state governments to perform at a certain level on standardized tests. In a middle school in New York, teachers were forced by the principle to teach subjects outside of their area because of an upcoming state test, and what resulted was that less than one in four middle school students in New York passed the exam (“Seven Reasons”). What this whole scenario suggests is that even when teachers’ intentions are honest, negative outcomes ensue. This example also reveals that certain subjects, particularly those that are going to be found on state mandated tests, are held more important than others. However, this model was only at the state level. Much severe consequences are likely to arise if President Obama issues a merit pay system because this system will be based off an even more all encompassing agenda with even stricter guidelines. With such a profound level of pressure from the U.S. Government, teaching to the test will certainly result be it for honest or dishonest purposes. Not only that, but teachers will not be able to even have the freedom to teach the subjects they want to teach, and knowledge is ultimately confined to what the government wants one to know or wants one to view as more important.

Currently, President Obama and many liberals are opposed to the No Child Left Behind Act, an educational reform movement enacted by President Bush when he was in office. For this reason, they are looking to once again restructure education in America, more specifically into a merit based pay system. However, the problems of No Child Left Behind that President Obama is opposed to parallel the problems that would arise with a national merit pay system. University of Maryland Associate Professor of Education Linda R. Valli, who began research on No Child Left Behind in 2000, has stated that the standardized testing of NCLB “actually undermined the quality of teaching in reading and math,” and poor teaching was due to “the pressure teachers were feeling to ‘teach to the test’” (“No Child Left”). The issues of NCLB are very similar to the potential issues of President Obama’s merit pay system. So, while President Obama and many liberals are advocating the termination of NCLB, they are also promoting educational reform in merit pay that could give the same results.

Another defective aspect about standardized tests is that they do not always necessarily reveal the truth about the gains of knowledge of students, which is what education supposedly aims for. Currently, President Obama’s economic stimulus bill calls for $5 billion to compensate schools, but schools can only get this money by showing how well they are performing on standardized tests and state standards (“Stricter Standards”). This sounds like an ideal way for Obama to track which schools and which states are making progress in addition to what schools and what teachers deserve money. One can see the faults of this when looking at an example of eighth graders in Tennessee. According to the Tennessean, an online news source for everything Tennessee, eighth graders in Tennessee have some of the worst math scores based on standardized testing, and they “…scored lower than their peers in thirty-six states” (TN Math Scores”). Under the president’s merit system, a very small proportion of the reform money would be going to school districts in Tennessee. This may seem justified because the eighth graders did not perform so well in math on the state-mandated test. However, this represents an average. Nobody knows for sure that there were not, for example, a few struggling eighth graders who were still having trouble with basic mathematical concepts whose teacher got them to the point of just beginning to understand some Algebra. Those students may have gotten many of the Algebra questions wrong on the exam, but they increased their knowledge in math. However, the standardized tests do not show this, and neither those students nor the teacher will be rewarded with money from Obama’s economic stimulus bill.

Even though there are many negative characteristics of both merit pay and the standardized tests that determine that higher pay, there are some gains that follow. Merit pay, for example, has the potential to reward successful, young teachers with success they have brought into the classroom and put them on a level equal to more experienced teachers. One younger teacher in an interview has said that a few of the young teachers “…who are at the bottom of the pay scale do brilliant work that often goes unrecognized” (“Good for Teachers?”). In addition, Michael Podgursky, professor of economics at the University of Missouri has claimed that when you give teachers the opportunity to earn more, “…you’re likely to see better results” (“Will Work, Says Researcher”). This certainly would apply to the younger teacher who would strive to be more successful in order to earn more. However, this may not have much resonance with the experienced teachers who have worked their way up the ladder for years because now they are at risk of their salaries not rising like they should. How this would yield “better results” is a bit unclear because the experienced teacher could have a couple of “bad eggs” in the classroom who bring down test score averages, resulting in no chances for bonuses, rewards, etc., for that particular school year. In addition, the younger teacher’s work does not go unrecognized because that teacher, if doing a good job, will continue to have a job with increased pay as he/she accumulates experience. The fact that he/she is given an opportunity to work their way up like the other teachers is recognition in itself.

Concerning standardized testing, there are also positives to be found. Standardized testing serves as a good general guideline for both the government and parents to see what they need to do to ensure that students are properly educated in core subject areas (“Pros and Cons”). With these results, the government, parents, and teachers are better equipped with information that will help steer students into the right direction. However, standardized tests should be left at that: a guideline. It should not be the driving force for all educational purposes because such a guideline is very general that leaves out multiple variables of education and knowledge. Standardized testing should serve as a very rough sketch of the current state of education in America and nothing more.

A merit pay system established by the national government may at first seem like the only logical solution to such a complicated problem. However, a similar system could be set up with much more appealing results if the responsibility is in the hands of the local government and communities within a given school district. Because pay seems to be the main problem, the solution is geared towards that very aspect. There are around 13,500 school districts in the U.S. (“School District”). Assuming that each district receives an equal share of the money, each district will receive approximately $370,370. In the school district I grew up in, there were around two hundred and twenty or so teachers. If each teacher were to be compensated equally, the result is around $1,675 for each teacher in the district. The teacher can earn more based on test scores, but there is not a lot of money in the national system for each individual district and teacher. Assuming that each teacher performs equally on standardized tests, then $1,675 is the highest that teachers in my district can go in terms of increased pay for that semester, year, etc. Also, a very well-deserving teacher may have had poor test scores and is not compensated fairly, while another teacher who did less work taught an advanced group of students. These are some problems of President Obama’s projected plan.
A plan on the local level could yield better results. Suppose a local government imposes a one-hundredth of a percent tax increase on the income instead of property tax on the residents living in a particular school district. My school district represents an average of 16,000 people with incomes of about $40,000 to $50,000. At the end of the year, this represents an average of about $6,400,000 accumulated from the residents of that district for the school in their district with each individual being taxed $400 at the end of the year. If all of this money is allowed to go to higher salaries for teachers, it could result in a $29,000 wage increase per teacher in my particular district, assuming that the teacher has earned it. Teachers in Indiana earned an average of $46, 591 in 2004-2005 (“Teacher in Indiana”). With a $29,000 wage increase, that results in a potential salary of around $75,000, a salary which fits more in line with what teachers ought to be compensated with.

Not only does this plan reflect rewarding teachers with reasonable salaries, but it also lets the community know where this money is going. Instead of being taxed for higher salaries for teachers that are virtually unknown to the ones being taxed, why not allow the people to be taxed for the benefit of teachers whose good deeds are already acknowledged? With this plan, parents of children can actually reward the teachers who are known to have positively influenced their children. The local governments could even take it a step further by allowing the residents to vote for which teachers deserve raises. This is ideal, because many residents already know about the good teachers and the bad ones, and in this way, people can have more control and responsibility on educational reform. Some power is, therefore, given to local communities who know how and where that money ought to be distributed.
In closing, a national merit pay system as a means of educational reform is a problem that is indeed very difficult to resolve rationally with concrete answers. What is clear, however, is that the cons of a merit pay system far outweigh the pros. For one, merit pay can result in favoritism based on illogical grounds as well as unfair situations for experienced teachers who have already proven themselves throughout the years. Also, the nature of a merit based system calls for broad standardized testing, which includes multiple implications. Teachers corrupted by the opportunity for increased pay can alter test scores for more money, and they have done this in the past. Teachers, whether impelled by dishonesty or honesty, must also teach to the test to some degree in order to meet standardized testing requirements, and this would be taken to the extreme in the context of standardized testing associated with merit pay. In turn, this causes education to be very limited. Finally, standardized tests do not always clearly show who a good or bad teacher was during a given school year. It does not reveal the whole truth concerning whether teachers actually increased the knowledge of students. Instead, standardized tests may reveal that there are some students that may be advanced but under the tutelage of a poor teacher who score high on a test whereas there are students who are a bit behind but under the instruction of a very good teacher, yet they score poorly on the test. Certainly, education in America is spiraling downward compared to that of other nations, and reform is needed. However, a merit based pay system and national standardized testing may not be the best approach to do this. There is probably no absolute answer for perfect educational reform in America, but there are clear answers of what “perfect” reform should not be. One of these answers of what it should not be is rewarding teachers based on merit pay.


Works Cited

"Become a Teacher in Indiana - IN -- Teacher Education | Certification | Credentials | Training." Teacher World - Education for Teachers and Administrators. Web. 12 Nov. 2009. .
Drevitch, Gary. "Merit Pay: Good for Teachers?" Scholastic. Jan. 2006. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. .
Gasbarra, Paul. "Obama Challenges Teachers' Unions on Merit Pay: Feat or Folly?" Public Agenda. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 10 Mar. 2009. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. .
Margie. "Pros and Cons of Standardized Testing." Bright Hub. 17 Sept. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. .
"Obama Education Plan Speech: Stricter Standards, Charter Schools, Merit Pay." The Huffington Post. 10 Mar. 2009. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. .
"Obama's Merit Pay For Teachers Will Work, Says Researcher." Web log post. Scientific Blogging. 13 Mar. 2009. Web. 9 Nov. 2009 .
Ottalini, David. "No Child Left Behind's Emphasis on 'Teaching to the Test' Undermines Quality Teaching." University of Maryland Newdesk. 8 Jan. 2008. Web. 15 Nov. 2009. .
Sadker, PhD, David M., and Karen R. Zittleman, PhD. "Test Problems: Seven Reasons Why Standardized Tests Are Not Working." Education.com. McGraw Hill. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. .
Sarrio, Jaime. "TN Math Scores Among Worst in U.S." The Tennessean. Electronic Express, 15 Oct. 2009. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. .
"School District." Wikipedia. 21 Oct. 2009. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. .
Troen, Vivian, and Katherine Boles. "How 'Merit Pay' Squelches Teaching." The Boston Globe. 28 Sept. 2005. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. .









SAMPLE PAPER 4

Censorship has a role in everyone’s life. Censorship is the suppression of speech or expression (Wikipedia, para. 1). Whether a person believes censorship is for the good of the public or not; it is not relevant to the fact that restrictions are made on information that is allowed to be shared. Many people are satisfied with the current system, that is, the public is only told what is “necessary.” What the government deems “necessary” changes frequently. First, it was necessary to tell the public of issues that may endanger them, but now people question even that. The right to information must not be one of the more important amendments to the Bill of Rights. Censorship threatens the government, the school system, the media, and corporations, which in turn contradicts the first amendment of the Bill of Rights. The citizens need to become of aware of the problem of censorship and demand the truth instead of accepting the current situation.

The first amendment to the Bill of Rights states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”(National Archives…, para. 1). The government of today continually disobeys this amendment as if it were one that could be ignored. They continually use excuses to explain their reason for withholding information from the general public. An excellent example to show this was during the September eleventh incident. The government used that disaster to their advantage. They refused information to us “for the good of the nation” because we were in a period of national crisis. The people accepted this because we all thought in order to fight terrorists it was necessary. There are many other examples to this injustice, one of which being the case of US v Stevens. In this issue the artist, Stevens, used animal cruelty in his art. The government wanted to censor his artistic work because of the content. “The government claims that the statute is constitutional because works with serious value will fall under an exception in the statute. This does not solve the problem, however. The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to protect unpopular, controversial, and even hateful and repulsive speech” (National Coalition…, para. 5). I’m not saying that animal cruelty is good at all, but something should not be censored just because the content, people have the right to see it and can choose for themselves if they want to continue to view the work, just like every other artistic piece.

Censorship is not an issue only found in the government, it is a prominent problem within the school systems as well. English continually tends to be the subject that creates the most problems with censorship. This is because of the books the teachers wish for the students to read. The suggestions for the required books are always forced to be scrutinized by the principle and the school board so that they can monitor the books that are exposed to the students. “For many years, American schools have been pressured to restrict or deny students access to books or periodicals deemed objectionable by some individual or group on moral, political, religious, ethnic, racial, or philosophical grounds” (Donelson, para. 1). Many of the objections to the books that the students read are from the parents or guardians. Such books as: Plato’s Republic, George Eliot’s Silas Marner, Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird, and Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five are given judgments such as: "This book is un-Christian," "You can't prove what that dirty old man is doing with that child between chapters," "The word rape is used several times. Children should not see this in any literature book," and "Its repetitious obscenity and immorality merely degrade and defile, teaching nothing" (para. 3 - 5). All of these statements are false and I believe to be made by ignorant people that only have personal vendettas toward the books. Reading each of those books was a new experience and forced intelligent arguments in morality. Censorship causes inadequate and dictated views on ideals, values, and cultural issues onto the students (para. 20 – 22). This is a disservice to all the students, giving them a censored education is the same as a giving them a partial education.

Within the media censorship can be a large issue. The media is the primary source of information to the American citizens. The government tries to censor some of the material that reaches the news and the papers but it doesn’t work very often, or so we think. There is still information that is kept from the citizens that the media does have control of and knows. Excellent examples of this are case files and battle plans that the military keep from the public. This can hurt society. My father told me that the military keep their files locked for many years before they can be released to the public. He said that many of their files have information that can improve medicine and increase our knowledge greatly. Geologically, the Theory of Plate Tectonics was not proven until only several years ago when the military released their maps of the ocean floor to the public that they had over two hundred years ago. Who knows what information or medical issues could be solved if this information were just accessible. A primary media source is the internet. The government has been known to shut down websites that has controversial material. Conspiracy toward the government websites are often targeted as hostile sites that jeopardize the American community. That is their justification to the destruction of the site. The only problem is it is a direct violation of the first amendment. Freedom of speech is the second thing mentioned and it is all in effect if there is no harm to others. The government thinks that by taking the initiative and closing it early they are preventing harm to others but it is never certain whether harm will rise from it or not. Morally, yes that is the correct decision but constitutionally? No, it was not.

Censorship within corporations can be seriously frightening. If corporations are able to censor the information that is released to the American citizens it could cause harm to many people. Information that was forced out of the Fraud and Drug Administration by the Freedom of Information Act reveals the problems of corporate censorship. A survey was taken with half of the Fraud and Drug Administration’s scientists participating. Of the ones participating 66% of them agree that the FDA “lacked the ability to adequately monitor the safety of prescription drugs once they are on the market” (Adams, para. 2. There were only a few scientists that said the FDA labeling was completely right when listing the safety concerns on medication (para. 3). “Nearly 1 in 5 scientists, 18%, said that they have ‘been pressured to approve or recommend approval’ for drugs that they felt were unsafe” (para. 4). The issue of censorship in corporations is frightening. To think that there may be medication in the local CVS that is inaccurately labeled with safety instructions is insane. It is apparent that censorship is harmful to the citizens, so why is it still such a large issue?

A counter argument that could be made to support censorship would be based on reactions to certain information. It is still hard for most to decide whether or not some information is best to be kept from the public. Statements that would cause mass hysteria within the population could be deemed as harmful information to share because of the danger that would be forced on to the people. In a hypothetical situation, would you want to know that the Nation was a only a hair length away from an all out nuclear war? Ok, so maybe it is not so hypothetical because it happened. During the Cold War the United States was incredibly close to entering a war that would most likely of wiped the earth of life. The American citizens were never told how close they actually were. All the people were told was that there was a threat of an attack. Just think of it though, what would happen if they were told? The United States would have gone into a state of panic, full of looting and other serious crimes. Was it the correct decision to withhold that information? It is a hard answer.

Information that could be harmful to society is kept from the citizens. The only problem being, the information that is thrown into that category is a vast variety that has no right to be kept from the American public. I am still grappling with the issue and can see both sides. The only solution that I see possible is for the people to fight for the information that they have a right to know. There are many organizations that do just that and get a great amount of information that should be shared. Acts such as the Freedom of Information Act also help uncover hidden truths that were illegally kept from the public. However, the greatest chance is with the people. People are the most powerful influence on the government and on society, if there was a great demand for the information there is nothing the could not uncover.

Bibliography
1. “Censorship.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_censorship#Citations_and_notes. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Web. 12 Nov. 2009.
2. Donelson, Ken. “The Right to Read and the English Teacher.” http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/righttoreadguideline. National Council of English Teachers, April 2009. Web. 12 Nov. 2009.
3. “NCAC on the Issues in US v Stevens.” http://www.ncac.org/NCAC-on-US-v.-Stevens. National Coalition Against Censorship, 8 Oct. 2009. Web. 12 Nov. 2009.
4. “Bill of Rights.” http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html. The Charters of Freedom, Web. 12 Nov. 2009.
5. Adams, Mike. “FDA censorship, suppression of its own scientists is routine, survey reveals.” http://www.naturalnews.com/005032_the_FDA_drugs_dangerous_drugs.html. Natural News, 25 Feb. 2005. Web. 12 Nov. 2009.


Music Education: An “Extracurricular”? (SAMPLE PAPER 5)

As school corporations find themselves receiving less and less funding, they attempt to minimize costs by eliminating what they feel are unnecessary programs, like music education, from their curriculum. Instead, they place value in more traditional subjects such as mathematics and the sciences. Many fail to see the proof showing how music education can not only enrich its students’ learning of other subjects, but also promote lifelong learning, social skills, and decrease illicit activity. As a result, music is usually among the first programs to be cut from a school’s curriculum during financial restrictions. To preserve music’s place in academia, teachers, parents, and community leaders must seek to be well-informed about this and communicate this knowledge to others.

The most relevant factors in this educational debate are the ability of music to cross over into other curricula and its influence on cognitive development. The overwhelming evidence available that legitimizes its necessity paints a crystal-clear picture in favor of music programs. “…music education enhances abstract reasoning needed in learning math and science” (Petress, par. 9). An excellent example of a way music can be integrated as a key “ingredient” in the instruction of other subjects is seen in the Music Educators Journal. Students selected a piece (most of them instrumental), developed a children’s story from what they thought the composer was trying to communicate, and compared their interpretation with the actual meaning of the piece (Kite, par. 4-8). Obviously, the primary “traditional” subject included in this program is language arts, specifically writing techniques like topic generation and revision (Kite, par. 9). However, including music in this process elevated its difficulty by requiring more steps in the creative process and comparing and making connections between seemingly separate topics (Kite, par. 14). This refreshing approach to learning also increased student interest in the project, according to its administrators (Kite, par. 12).

Research also proposes other effects of music in language arts saying that vocal performance “…may encourage language development. Because music is generally processed on the right side of the brain and language on the left, singing…stimulates hemispheric interaction” (Boyd, p. 7). According to University studies, the interhemispheric communication facilitated by music is more substantial than any other activity tested (Lehr, par. 10). Other physiological evidence favoring music education states that learning to play an instrument betters a pupil’s academic potential because it propitiates the formation of new neural pathways. This effect of learning and exposure to new stimuli is vital because when new connections are made, the brain is better-equipped to perform at its best (Lehr, par. 2).

Once again, music plays a crucial role in the progression of life-skills as it helps build a foundation for social and cultural knowledge. It is important to acknowledge the advantage that participation in music can provide even at a very young age. Music is first “taught” by the parents of an infant through singing and rocking. Parents who engage in these or comparable behaviors experience “…an enhanced sense of warmth and security for both” thus forging stronger emotional bonds (Boyd, p.5). These are some early signs of emotional maturation in the infant. A goal of music that is often overlooked, especially in relation to the early years, is its use as a facilitator of social interaction and emotional development. It could be easy to think that the primary aim of studying music is to train to improve one’s playing ability. However, focusing on technique and ability is actually discouraged when working with small children. “Criticism and fault-finding are completely out of place in early musical development…” (Boyd, p. 6) The advancements to be developed from these activities include lengthening attention-spans, exploring, and group interaction. These skills can also be of use to older children and those with learning disabilities who are more likely to succeed because of their increased confidence and communication skills. Because music is present in the majority of civilizations, it can also be used as a common tie when investigating other cultures and can promote tolerance (Boyd, par. 14).

The impact music has on the lives of its students affects so much more than just their classroom performance, but also on their society as a whole. One illustration of this can be seen in this statistic: students involved in band or orchestra responded with the lowest lifetime and present use of drugs (Petress, par. 6). While similar results can probably be cited for other activities, like sports, music holds its ground because of its ability to boost cognitive development and serve as an outlet for those not athletically-inclined. This emotional outlet for self-expression is also thought to contribute to the reduction of violent behavior in teenagers (Petress, par. 7). Musical instruction can also promote the development of values useful in many life situations such as goal setting, practice, and the ability to learn from constructive criticism. Others values include those more academic in nature like being able to listen to instructions and broader knowledge (Petress, par. 4). These factors, along with others, should be weighed when a school corporation attempts to validate the elimination of music programs.

A reason used to justify the decreased funds for music education, especially instrumental instruction, is “…the high costs of sheet music and instrument purchase and repair” (Petress, par. 3). Could one not examine the costs of many sports programs at many public high schools and see comparable expenses? As is previously mentioned, music poses some potential benefits that sports seem to be lacking, especially in intellectual development. And, after all, isn’t bettering one’s education the central reasoning for these financial reallocations? I do not attempt to diminish the importance of athletics in my questioning and I acknowledge that it too is experiencing budget reductions. I am simply responding to the apparent popular opinion that sports should hold priority over music programs. This is the effect of the general public’s lack of understanding of what can be gained from the pursuit of music other than learning an instrument. The association of music as frivolous and inapplicable to other subjects has damaged its value as well. “…identification of school music with relaxation has led many parents and school teachers to undervalue music as a fundamentally important branch of human learning” (Boyd, p. 13).

Other factors affecting this scenario include standardized tests and the No Child Left Behind Act, which, oddly enough, identifies the arts as “…a vital component of a school education” (Petress, par. 8). The emphasis on succeeding in tested topics, such as reading, is strong because funding is often directly proportional to these scores (Abril, par. 2). These happenings raise some thought-provoking questions about what is necessary for successful learning. For example, since music is not a subject tested on standardized tests, does this mean it is of minimal importance to a child’s education? If so, does this mean that other subjects not explicitly covered in these tests, such as history and foreign languages, are equally unimportant? I would think most could agree this is not the case. Noting music’s substantial influence on SAT results, a test with no music component, helps solidify its role in academic progress. Music students score considerably higher on this examination and earned more scholastic honors than their non-musical classmates (Petress, par. 8).

Despite the existence of substantial, scholarly evidence highlighting the many ways music enhances the intellectual, social, and character-building aspects of the individual and community, school boards seem unconvinced of its legitimacy during budget cuts. This situation necessitates the advocacy of teachers, parents, and other members of the community to inform others that music is not extracurricular, but can be an integral key to understanding other “traditional” subjects. The life-long advancements to be had from music are firmly grounded and, worthy of examination. Therefore, educational leaders must be willing to ponder the logic of eliminating a program that is proven to benefit another subject, such as reading, in efforts to improve that subject.

(SORRY, NO WORK CITED FOR THIS ONE)




Critical Witness: Beauty vs. Society (SAMPLE PAPER 6)

Achieving a healthy definition of beauty may seem like a trivial concern when compared to the other traumatic events taking place in our world today, such as the war in Iraq and the drug war in Mexico, but raising secure and independent children is a crucial part of our future as a society. Children today are bombarded with misleading images and ideas (Lying Eyes, 2). From Disney movies to commercials to reality television, we are repeatedly exposed to messages about body image and society’s unrealistic and unhealthy definition of true beauty. Starting at an increasingly young age, we are taught that beauty is what you see on the outside because that is what sells products. These images that we see echoed in the media reinforce the importance of being attractive according to society’s standards (What Is True Beauty, 3). The media and society literally bank on the population feeling negatively about themselves and feeling insecure about the way they look to make a quick dollar. The media needs be less obsessed with the idea of achieving the perfect body and more concerned with helping to create a healthy society. Along with that, men and women must also learn to be less concerned with their looks. We must all challenge ourselves to change the way we think about and treat our bodies (Concern Over, 11).

Beauty is a large industry within our culture. Do you ever think about how many hours a day you spend in front of the mirror critiquing yourself, or how often you think about what others are thinking of you? It is most likely a bigger part of the average person’s daily life than many realize (Lying Eyes, 2). Defining true beauty is such a popular concept these days that mathematicians have even taken the time to create the “perfect” dimensions of a body. According to their formulas, the eyes should be a certain distance apart, the nose must extend a specific distance, the cheek bones and lips must be of good shape and size, the ears must lie flawlessly against the head, and the head itself must meet certain perimeter requirements. This is just the beginning; similar mathematical characteristics are also available for the other parts of the body, including the length of the torso, arms, and legs (What is True Beauty, 1). Unsurprisingly, these measurements leave no room for error. If a person’s features are off by a few centimeters, does that make them less beautiful? What one considers to be beautiful may be completely different that what someone else considers being beautiful. Discovering that one’s features do not meet the requirements for beauty is not something that would be good for a person’s psychological or emotional health. This is an example of the type of influences the media and society present the population with that lead to things like anorexia, bulimia, and self-esteem issues (Body Image: Loving, 1).

The concern now is why so much importance is being placed on the idea of physical beauty. It is common knowledge that being physically attractive often gets both men and women further in many aspects of life. These aspects include school, work, relationships and other avenues. Benefiting from physical beauty is not something that is just seen in the movies anymore. As bad as it sounds, physical attractiveness plays a large role in our day to day lives. Beauty has become an obsession for those who no longer believe that characteristics such as grace, charm, or personality is enough to get them the things they want out of life (What Is True Beauty, 8).

The phrase “Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder” was coined long ago during Shakespeare’s time and is a much more acceptable definition of beauty than the one’s adhered to today (Beauty Lies, 2). The definition of beauty currently lies in the hands of the media. According to Karen Ritter, a licensed clinical social worker, if the beholder has been repeatedly bombarded by too much television, too many videos, or has read too many magazines, the eye may develop an unhealthy tunnel vision (Body Image Distortion, 2). “Body image is not just an appearance,” said Ritter. “Your body image has to do with your health, your various talents, and how able you are to be in tune with sensations in your body” (Body-Image Distortion, 3). The eye of the beholder is too often plagued by unrealistic expectations of our culture today. It is almost impossible to escape the media and its negative influences.

One common example of the unrealistic standards media sets for what is considered a “normal” body weight and appearance is Barbie. She has no fat on her body, but huge breasts. If Barbie were life-size, she would be 5’9” and weigh 110 pounds. Barbie would not be able menstruate due to the low levels of fat on her body. Girls are not alone in the struggle with body image. Boys are also given the impression that men are supposed to naturally have bulging muscles all over their bodies (Body Image, 4). The media’s idea of what is normal continues to get thinner and thinner for women and more muscular for men. Only approximately 5% of women worldwide have the genetic make up to ever achieve the long and thin model-like body type sold by the media (Body Image, 6).

Unlike the commercials and the other media influences that tell the population beauty strictly resides on the outside, there are several companies and proper influences that have begun a campaign to prove otherwise. Companies like Dove are taking a stand against the monster that is the media and are not afraid to tell the world that beauty exists everywhere you wish to find it (Dove’s Campaign, 1). If we lived in a healthy and accepting society, this is the thought process individuals would have when they thought about beauty and body images. Instead, society has an addiction with perfection. Young girls especially have fallen victim to the media and the stereotypes that attempt to persuade us we must achieve the perfect body to be accepted and acknowledged within the world. 42% of elementary school students between 1st and 3rd grades want to be thinner, 80% of children what are ten years old are afraid of being fat, 25% of men and 45% of women are on a diet on any given day, and 80% of women are not satisfied with their appearance (How Bad, 2). These percentages are proof that the media is taking over the way we perceive ourselves.
For every heartwarming and inspirational commercial like those Dove is working to inform society with, there are thousands of others that work in a completely opposite fashion. It is impossible to turn on the television without seeing a diet commercial. Commercials about weight loss, dieting, and having a thinner or more toned body prey on our self-esteem at every break in the action. The diet industry wants society to feel negatively about themselves so that we will buy their products in an attempt to achieve the type of body our culture tells us we should have. With all of the messages we receive from the media, it is no wonder our society struggles with body image. This struggle is only becoming more and more difficult for our culture to overcome. According to studies conducted in 2000, the media is playing an increasingly larger role in a women’s body image than reports from 1990 show. With this information, it can de deduced that society’s meager attempts to teach men and women of all ages to be wary of the media and to maintain healthy lifestyle practices, is in vain. The media’s effect on our psychological health is only getting stronger. These results are disturbing because a negative body image leads to bigger problems such as low self esteem, depression, obesity, anorexia, and bulimia (Concern Over, 4).

The way in which the information is presented to society and the lies that come with the information is not healthy or fair, but there is some truth to what is said. Behind the desire to make a quick buck is a concern for the health of the human population. The definition of what is truly beautiful has been taken to the extreme, especially on the big screen, but society would benefit from taking more responsibility for their health. Dieting is not a bad concept until it becomes unhealthy and unrealistic. If done in a secure environment and in a healthy manner, there are many benefits that can come from it. There is much unbalance in our world when it comes to how we attempt to fit in and be accepted. In an effort to rebuke the media’s negative influences, we must learn to challenge the media’s definition of beauty and acceptability. The messages only work if society believes them. We must listen to our bodies and take rest days when necessary and only eat when hungry. Wearing clothes that fit, rather than trying to fit into old clothes and choosing to surround ourselves with size-friendly and accepting people is also important. Lastly, recognizing that healthy, beautiful people come in all colors, shapes, and sizes helps to keep the negative thoughts at bay and may be the key to success and happiness (Body Image, 25).

One of society’s biggest flaws is its attempt to replicate true beauty (The Complex Definition, 5). Young girls see beautiful movie stars walk down the red carpet or across the screen of their favorite movie and want to be exactly like them. This is one of the many reasons why plastic surgery has become so popular recently. Females of this generation feel the need to look just like their favorite movie star and many will go to great lengths to achieve their dream. These methods of replication grow to be even more drastic as girls age. Even before children enter middle school, many young girls begin to dress, walk, talk, and act like their favorite movie star. Within a few years they are applying make-up in an attempt to transform their appearance into that of their idol. It is not long after the make-up stage before these girls are committing themselves to unrealistic life styles that include unhealthy diets and rigorous work out regimens. At its most extreme stage, females go under the knife to achieve the body or appearance of those that society has deemed “perfect”. Today’s younger generation would be much better off if they were able to understand that true beauty cannot be duplicated. Each individual is unique and special in his or her own way. The face we see in the mirror may never be reproduced again (The Complex Definition, 6). This individuality is what makes each person special in their own unique way. Learning to respect and love our own distinct qualities is an important part of accepting the bodies each of us has been given.

It is an undeniable fact that the idea of what is considered beautiful has changed immensely over the years. Today, to be considered beautiful, a woman must be stick thin and men must be ripped. It is hard to imagine that there used to be a time when women with curves were what was desired (Body Images, 6). Beauty should be viewed as a combination of physical features, inner spirit, personality, intelligence, and soul (The Complex Definition, 5). But until society as a whole is able to look at beauty with a less restricted point of view, it will continue to fall victim to the media’s influences and fall within the money making traps that have fooled so many. At the end of the day, true beauty does not need a definition. It is not something that can be nailed down and done justice with words. It was never meant to be outlined by a set of measurements or a specific set of characteristics (What Is True Beauty, 3). The definition of true beauty is something that we must all learn to define on our own. Women and men wanting to be attractive is completely normal, but unfortunately, many are striving towards something that is not realistic or achievable and leads to many health consequences. The issue lies not with our fascination with beauty images or with our desire to imitate them, but with what we have come to define as beautiful (Concern Over, 11). Keeping the media and its ulterior motives at bay is one way to begin writing your own personal definition; no one can define it accurately but you. How you look should never be more important that who you are (Body Image Distortion, 10).




Works Cited
"“Beauty Lies in the Eyes of the Beholder, but Not Entirely” How True Is This Statement? | Answerbag." Answerbag.com | Ask Questions, Get Answers, Find Information. Web. 07 Apr. 2010. .

"Body Image." SNAC. Web. 08 Apr. 2010. .

"Body-Image Distortion a Growing Problem Among Women and Men - HealthyPlace." HealthyPlace.com - Trusted Mental Health Information and Support - HealthyPlace. Web. 07 Apr. 2010. .

"Body Image: Loving Yourself Inside and Out." Womenshealth.gov - 1-800-994-9662. Web. 10 Apr. 2010. .
"Concern Over Strong Media Influence On Women's Body Image." Medical News Today: Health News. Web. 10 Apr. 2010. .

"Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty | Teachable Moment." Media Awareness Network | Réseau éducation Médias. Web. 08 Apr. 2010. .
"How Bad Is Your Body Image?" HubPages. Web. 10 Apr. 2010. .

"Lying Eyes - Distorted Body Image." Suite101.com: Online Magazine and Writers' Network. Web. 08 Apr. 2010. .

"The Complex Definition Of Beauty." Squidoo : Welcome to Squidoo. Web. 07 Apr. 2010. .

"What Is True Beauty? - The Beauty Biz - Article." Beauty, Fashion, Health, Diet - Articles about All Aspects of the World of Beauty. Web. 07 Apr. 2010. .



Critical Witness – Depictions of Race in Mass Media (SAMPLE PAPER 7)

Oftentimes in today’s society, we hear that America is one of the most diverse nations in existence today. Couple this with the nation having elected a biracial president in Barack Obama and there are a large number of people who will try to claim that America is now a “post-racial” society that does not see race at all. However, despite these claims, there are very few heroes and roles models for minorities, children of color in particular. The Screen Actors’ Guild has produced statistics showing that 72.5 % of all roles in film and television went to Caucasian actors, while 13.3% went to African-American actors, 6.4% went to Latino or Hispanic actors, 3.8% went to Asian or Pacific Islander actors, and 0.3% of roles went to actors who were of other or unknown ethnicity (McNary). When even the source of the statistics says “Diversity lags”, one can be sure that there is a problem in racial representation. One of the major ways of combating this would be to open up more roles for Asian American actors that are not stereotypes. Instead of specifying Caucasian actors for race-neutral roles (such as a teacher or athlete), opening the roles to other ethnicities can help show that people of color are just as capable of "saving the world" as white people are.

The subtle idea that “white is good” pervades our society to the point where it is accepted subconsciously as a part of the society around us. For example, try to think of an actor of East Asian descent that is not doing Kung Fu or karate movies and you will find yourself with few or no people that fit the bill. Genuinely dynamic roles for actors of color are difficult to come by, even today. The practice of “Yellowface”, which refers to “the continuation in film of having white actors playing major Asian and Asian American roles” (I, Michelle), is common for many films even today. While minstrelsy is very taboo in today’s society, there are countless examples of Yellowface both throughout Hollywood’s history and through today: The Mysterious Fu Manchu (1929-31), the various Charlie Chan films (1931-1935), Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961), the infamous Kung Fu series where David Carradine usurped a role for whom Bruce Lee was intended (1972-75), even modern films such as I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry (2005) and Balls of Fire (2007) all feature white actors taking over roles that could easily (and according to some, should) be filled by American actors of Asian descent (I., Michelle). This takes away work from hard working Asian American actors who would do anything to be in roles that portrayed them as anything but the new immigrant who is the package delivery guy or the submissive young Asian girl or the Asian guy who never gets the girl. On top of that, it is wrong to assume that no Asian actors of any kind could have been found to fill these roles instead of Caucasian actors who already do not have problems finding work in Hollywood.

One of the upcoming examples of modern day yellowface that is being very closely followed is the movie, The Last Airbender, directed by M. Night Shyamalan and based off of the hit Nickelodeon series, Avatar: The Last Airbender (not to be confused with James Cameron’s Avatar). In the original series, the three season story revolves around a pan-Asian world, featuring characters from cultures that were Asian and Inuit based with very little visible Western influence in the show. It is generally accepted that the Air Nomads were based off of Tibetan Buddhist monks; the Water Tribes after Inuit and Yupik tribes; The Earth Kingdom after several East Asian countries, but primarily China; and the Fire Nation off of Imperialistic Japan – all of which can be seen by observing the various cultures throughout which the main characters traverse.

However, when it came time to cast actors for the live action adaptation, the actors picked for the four largest roles were to be filled with white actors. After a fan protest started up at “Aang Ain’t White” on LiveJournal (referring to the titular last airbender of the series) (“Saving…”), one of the four leading actors, Jessie McCartney, was replaced with Dev Patel of Slumdog Millionaire fame – only he would be playing the main antagonist, Zuko, thus making a world where there was once Asian and Inuit heroes and turning it into one where the antagonistic Fire Nation is now played by actors who appear to be Middle Eastern and the main heroes are white children saving the oppressed continent of mixed ethnicities in the Earth Kingdom. This makes it so that the message that only white people can save the world is perpetuated in a media that was supposed to show heroes of color, which are rare enough as it is in the world. Not only that, but it increases the already saturated amount of media that portrays Middle Eastern or Middle Eastern-looking people as the enemy and is thus an unjustly unbalanced – not to mention wrong – portrayal.

But if we as a society do not see race, then why are there so few heroes of color? And why are established characters of color repeatedly played by Caucasian actors? One argument is the need to cater to the majority. Indeed, Caucasian Americans are by and large the majority of the nation with over 240 million out of the over 300 million American citizens identifying as White or Caucasian (“Population Estimates”). Therefore, in the eyes of Hollywood and other producers of mass media, it would make sense to appeal to those of the majority seeing as they hold the majority of the available money for moviemakers. However, white people are fast becoming a minority in the United States, with both the U. S. Census Bureau and The Pew Research Center both projecting such figures by 2050 (“U. S. Population”, Passel). Even without that fact, the assumption that Caucasian people can only identify with other Caucasians is misguided at best and patronizing at worst, especially as children of color often have to look toward Caucasian heroes already and surely Caucasian children can do the same with heroes of color, showing them that not all African Americans are poor gang members or that not all Asian Americans are overachieving academics. And above all else, discrimination to make money is still discrimination.

Another common argument is that, since the movie is aimed at children, then race definitely does not matter because “children don’t see race”. However, this is far from the truth. Sixty years ago, a study was done by Kenneth and Mamie Clark in which they showed African American children two dolls, identical save for one obvious difference, skin color – one white, one black. The children were asked various questions comparing and contrasting the dolls such as “Which doll is the nice doll?”, “Which doll is the ugly doll?”, “Which doll would you rather play with?”, “Which doll looks most like you?” and other related questions. While the group sampling was small, most of the children in the study chose positive attributes to describe the white doll and negative attributes to describe the black doll. In 2006, the exercise was repeated by a high school child with results that greatly echoed the original study done sixty years prior. A junior college English professor performed a similar test using three Barbie dolls – one white, one black, and one Latina – also got similar results (“Do children…”). Researchers Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman have found that children can see racial differences as early as six months and children often group people together in their heads by race without any prompting beforehand. The fact that many parents do not talk about race explicitly with their children (with white families less likely than non-white to do so) does not help in truly teaching children that we are equal if something as easily visible as race is ignored (Bronson 55-56). When children are internalizing ideas about race at such a young age, it leads to assumptions about people of other races that no one told the, but they have reached by observing the world around them. Without roles models of color as well as Caucasian ones, children learn that only white people are heroes and only white people can be leaders in the world.
The most frequent of all the arguments in defense of casting practices that favor white actors is “they chose the best actors for the role”. However, there is a danger in assuming that looking like a character and acting the best are mutually exclusive. Organizations such as The Media Action Network for Asian Americans (also known as MANAA) and the East West Players strive for equal opportunity for Asian American actors and prove that there are minorities that can perform as well as any Caucasian actor, despite Hollywood’s tendency to place Asians and other minorities in the background.

The number one method that one can take to stop the imbalance in Hollywood’s movie roles is to boycott movies that use discriminatory casting practices. The Last Airbender, The Prince of Persia, and other movies that have characters of color played by white actors are good places to start. Another way is to support authors, filmmakers, and other creators who have protagonists of color who have very well balanced roles such as in Precious and The Kite Runner. And last, but not least, to educate one self on the issues surrounding the portrayal of characters of color in Hollywood. Many blogs provide perspectives of people of color as they see how race is portrayed in media and in society and many of them are great places to start.

Works Cited
Bronson, Po, and Marryman Ashley. "See Baby Discriminate." Newsweek 14 Sep 2009: Print.
“Do Children See Race?”. Racebending.com. 13 April 2010. .
I., Michelle. “Yellowface: a Story in Pictures”. Racebending.com. 11 April 2010. .
McNary, Dave. “SAG stats: Diversity lags”. 23 October 2009. Variety. 11 April 2010. .
Passel, Jeffery and D’Vera Cohn. “Immigration to Play Lead Role in Future U. S. Growth”. 11 February 2008. Pew Research Center. 11 April 2010. .
“Population Estimates”. U. S. Census Bureau, Population Division. 11 April 2010. .
“Saving the World with Postage”. LiveJournal. 11 April 2010. .
“U. S. Population Projections”. U. S. Census Bureau. 11 April 2010. .

"No End in Sight" Notes (for my noon section)

Hey, folks. Sorry about the [ever-ongoing] technology problems. I hope you were able to finish watching "No End in Sight" off www.freedocumentaries.org or youtube. Anyway, I know it's a complicated issue with a lot of names and facts to remember, so I'm pasting in my notes. Hope they help! If you use these for your paper, just add a parenthetical citation, i.e. (Class Notes).


1) The film begins by stating a number a number of problems that the U.S. faced in Iraq-including a lack of adequate supplies, troops, and a workable plan. The film also points out how, in the build-up to the war, the public was told that it would be quick, relatively painless, and cheap, something I (and probably your parents) remember from the news at the time.


2) The film shows an ironic scene in which Rumsfeld says Bush's contributions will be recorded by history. What do you think Bush’s place is history will be?


3) Do the filmmakers have a bias? Do they make this bias obvious through their lighting and editing? It's not necessarily bad to make your bias clear—in fact, it's an honest thing to do—but we as the audience should be willing to fact check. I think there's a bias in this film, but I also think that they make a serious effort to show all sides of the debate and verify their claims.


4) May 1st, 2003-Bush says: "In the battle of Iraq, the United States and her allies have prevailed." Four years later, 3,000 more American deaths, 20,000 American wounded. Baghdad has at least 10-15 bombings a day. Civilian death toll could be as high as 600,000.


5) Robert Hutchings, Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, produced a detailed, disheartening report on Iraq that the president and his staff immediately condemned, but the president hadn't actually read it!


6) Colonel Paul Hughes says he immediately suspected bin Laden on 9/11, when the Pentagon was attacked.


7) Marc Garlasco, senior Iraq analyst, was immediately told to see if there was any link between al Qaeda and Iraq. He concluded that there was NO relationship. So why did Bush and most of his staff insist that there was?


8) History—Bush's inner circle had a long history with Iraq. Hussein used chemical weapons against Iran, as well as his own people, but Reagan feared Iran more and supported Saddam Hussein. Said one State Department document, "Human rights and chemical weapons use aside, in many respects our interests run roughly parallel to those of Iraq." Iran and Iraq fight to a stalemate. Iraq invades Kuwait (first Gulf War). U.S. sweeps in and defeats Iraq, but Saddam Hussein left alive. Bush Sr. urges a revolt. Iraqis revolt; U.S. doesn't support the revolt and the rebels are massacred. Under the economic sanctions (especially during the Clinton Administration), countless more Iraqi citizens die while the rich remain wealthy. The desperate turn to fundamentalist Islam (historically, desperate people often turn to radical movements and/or religions). Hussein attempts to assassinate Bush Sr.


9) Jan. 20th, 2003, President George W. Bush signed NSPD #24 which gave control of post-war Iraq to the Pentagon, meaning that technically, Iraq could be governed without the direct oversight of the White House or Congress.


10) Ahmed Chalabi is named president of the Iraqi National Congress. He is widely viewed with suspicion; the U.S. Intelligence community didn't trust him. He said that post-war Iraq would be pro-American if he was in charge. The plan—the U.S. would stay for 3-4 months, install Chalabi, then in 2003, we'd start leaving. (Obviously, that didn’t happen.)


11) Initially, the U.S. was welcomed. Most Iraqis were overjoyed to be freed from Saddam’s brutal reign. Why did things change? In WWII, the planning to occupy Germany was started two years in advance. In Iraq, it was started 60 days in advance. Retired general Jay Garner was put in charge. Instead of leading 22,000 men, as he had in the past, he would be in charge of the entire country of Iraq. Ambassador Barbara Bodine was placed in charge of Iraq's capital, Baghdad. They had minimal staff, no computers, no plan, almost no one who spoke Arabic, etc.


12) Donald Rumsfeld, then Secretary of Defense, said we weren't there to run Iraq or establish marshal law, just to get rid of Saddam Hussein. American soldiers offered little or no intervention in the looting. The looting escalated, due in large part to about 100,000 criminals that Saddam Hussein released from jail prior to the war. One estimate of the damage from the looting—12 billions dollars! Rumsfeld: "Stuff happens!" Imagine your own city/country is being looted on an unprecedented scale. How would this affect your morale?


13) Bodine made a list of 20 sites that need to be protected. The list was ignored. For example, the National Museum of Baghdad, which contained some of the world's oldest artifacts, priceless treasures as much as 7,000 years old, and Iraq's National Library and National Archives were all burnt down. Obviously, this had a tremendous psychological and economic effect on peaceful Iraqis.


14) Rumsfeld originally wanted only about 100,000 troops. General Shinseki testified before Congress, despite pressure to keep his mouth shut, and said it would take several hundred thousand to do the job right. Colin Powell and Dick Armitage privately agreed. Rumsfeld eventually conceded to sending a little more—a total of 160,000.


15) Not enough U.S. and coalition troops to stop the violence or ensure the safety of Iraqi civilians. Iraqi v. Iraqi violence escalates.


16) April 23, 2003, Rumsfeld replaces (fires?) General Jay Garner and puts Paul Bremer in charge instead. Bremer immediately purged at least 20,000 members of the Ba'ath party, including those who had joined only to save their lives. Many of these were the "technocrats," the most educated and experienced Iraqi public officials. This further crippled Iraq's economy. 27% to 50% unemployment in Iraq. (By comparison, the U.S. had 25% unemployment during the Great Depression.) Imagine you're a civilian who's already endured a brutal dictator, the destruction of all your cultural history, and rampant lawlessness and murder, and on top of that, you haven't been able to find a job for eight or so years.

17) Bremer disbanded Iraq's army and secret police, thereby infuriating half a million armed men! Many of these men, out of work and angry, joined the insurgency instead. The U.S. then had to train a new military in Iraq from the ground up—something which, according to General Garner, can take years.


18) Iraq had around 70 large weapons storage depots and many ammunition dumps, but there weren't enough U.S. soldiers to guard them. Since many of the insurgents were former military men, they knew where the weapons/munitions were. The film doesn't mention Al Qa'qaa, but that's yet another example. Details are sketchy, but it’s believed that as much as 370 TONS of explosives was probably stolen. If you happened to be watching the news around that time, you probably noticed that's when attacks and suicide bombings started happening on a massive scale.


19) Paul Hughes says that he repeatedly told Walt Slocombe (Bremer’s second-in-command) that he had plenty of Iraqi soldiers who wanted to join with the U.S., but Slocombe (according to Hughes) ignored him, even though Slocombe wasn't actually in Iraq and hadn't met with the Iraqi military leaders. Slocombe also admits that they didn't consult with the U.S. military officials before supporting Bremer’s decision to put half a million armed men out of work.


20) U.S. troops did not have adequate armor. Despite constant attacks, Rumsfeld and Bremer said it wasn't a gorilla war, just isolated violence, etc. A key scene: a U.S. soldier asks why they don't have adequate armor; Rumsfeld basically says it's because they haven't had the time and resources to make it yet.


21) Hughes says he repeatedly left "the green zone" to meet with actual Iraqis, whereas most of the rest of those in charge of reconstruction did not. Bodine was fired for rocking the boat. Hughes said a lot of "pretty boys" were hired to work with the reconstruction because their families had made substantial financial contributions; however, these new hires had little or no experience and did virtually nothing. Every three months, they'd be cycled out.


22) Iraqi contractors were ignored so that U.S. contractors (like Parsons and Halliburton) could be brought in at much greater cost.


23) $18 billion dollars earmarked for reconstruction, but one year later, only $1 billion had been spent (i.e. the Iraqis had no water, heat, power, etc., despite what Bush and Bremer had promised).


24) Bremer allegedly refused to meet with many Iraqis. He also wouldn't return calls or meet with Sergio Vieira de Mello, the U.N. chief envoy, who had come to Iraq (with a team of U.N. diplomats who spoke Arabic) to try and mediate with the Iraqis. Sergio was later killed in a bombing.


25) 45,000 civilian contractors serving in a military capacity, often with very bad judgment (like in the case of Blackwater, which the film doesn't mention, who opened fire on and massacred unarmed Iraqi civilians).


26) Said one Iraqi: "Saddam hurt us badly. This is true. This is something we won't forget. But what came is worse than Saddam."


27) The insurgency was made up of many different groups with different religious views and goals.


28) As the situation in Iraq got worse, the CIA made a special report with several scenarios, but the president didn't bother to read it—even the one page summary.


29) Muqtada al-Sadr used the frustration and desperation of the Iraqis to fuel anti-American sentiments and gain political power in 2005 elections.


30) Cheney, in 2005: "we're in the last throes of the insurgency", but the violence continued!


31) In 2005, the U.S. escalated training of Iraqi soldiers. Rumsfeld "resigns".


32) As of 2010, the estimated costs of the Iraq war: around 740 BILLION dollars! (That's roughly double the costs of the war in Afghanistan, according to www.costofwar.com.) This is epically higher than we were promised it would cost before the Iraq War, like when Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said that due to Iraq's oil revenue, the war would pay for itself. What could we have done in terms of education and healthcare in the United States with that money? When President Eisenhower was leaving office, we warned America about the "military-industrial complex." In other words, watch out for those who encourage us to go to war so they can get rich!


33) To quote Marine lieutenant named Seth Moulton: "Are you telling me that's the best America can do?"


34) Since this documentary was made, the situation in Iraq has become more stable. Why? We sent more soldiers to restore order (aka "the troop surge" talked about my politicians), drove out most of the terrorists, and put control of the Iraqi government more in the hands of the Iraqis.



35) The big questions: why were all these mistakes made (so that we can avoid making them in the future), and what do we do now? Whether you're conservative, liberal, or moderate, what's the moral of the story here?