This class has been great for me and there are several reasons why. I think that the assignments we've had have really helped me learn a few new things. However, I did not do as well as I wanted on the papers I wrote this semester. I am glad though that my writing has improved.

The first thing I want to mention that helped me in various ways was the readings about education that we were assigned to read. I benefited from those because after reading them I decided to do things such as, figure out why I'm here at school and about some of the ideas that these writers came up about the whole educational system, why people initially come to universities, and such. I learned that I do not want to follow the trend of just coming to school because I was told to, but to come to learn more about the world I'm in and to also learn some real skills.

That brings me to a specific skill I was able to find that I wanted to learn. In fact it is the degree I want to acquire. It's English. I didn't really know before that I really liked writing or reading about literature and the different ideas writers have and thinking or writing about them. It is very educational to do that and you learn about yourself through doing that. Another reason I want to become a writer is so I can share my ideas with others.

I will admit though that I could have spent a bit more time on revising my papers before I turned them in. I will admit that I did not go through almost all my papers before I turned them in. Big mistake! I wish that I would have done so because I probably would have gotten a better grade on them than I had. Lesson learned: never turn in a paper if you haven't revised it at least once.

Even though I did not really concentrate a lot on my papers my writing seemed to improve. At the beginning of the semester I did not have really any motivation for doing very well in this class. Not until I found what I wanted my degree to be was I truly motivated.

Through writing papers, getting comments on them, and actually figuring out what I wanted my degree to be all seemed make an impact on my writing. I also enjoyed the readings on education because of the ideas in them. Overall, this class was a good one.

The peer review experience has not been very beneficial for me. I think that my teacher's comments written on my paper were more beneficial.  I think that I could have gotten more out of it if we were to  talk one-on-one with the peer whose paper we were reviewing.

I think that the peer review work sheets were good, but they were boring and did not allow us to share interactively why we thought they should make specific changes. Although, I do think that those sheets had good ideas for things to look for to help our peers have a better paper. However, it was a lot of work and I did not like that. Instead, if we were to read paragraph-by-paragraph telling our peer what they could work on after each paragraph whether it be organization, grammar, etc., then the process may be less boring and more interactive. Also, it may even be more beneficial because we will be able to share more why we think they should change something rather than just telling them to change it and thereby clarify anything they might not have understood they should change.

As I can recall, it was the teachers comments that made me write better than the peer review experience. I think that I loved getting comments written down on my paper from a teacher who is quite knowledgeable in English writing. Too bad that the peer experience before we had to turn in the paper wasn't as beneficial as the comments we got back after we had already handed it in.

Those are my thoughts on the peer review experience I've had in this class. I truly do not think that the way we did it this semester was all that beneficial for us. It was the teacher's comments after we got our papers back that I think really made the impact on me becoming a better writer.  

This week we were assigned to read two chapters. The first chapter is titled, "The Medium Is the Massage Of Course” and the second is titled, “The Inquiry Method”. I thought some of the ideas pointed out in both chapters were interesting and would like to discuss some ideas outlined in these two chapters.

I really thought it relevant that teachers do indeed have much power given to them and perhaps too much. Students seem to not be given a lot of chance to question or learn at their own pace because they are compelled by their teachers’ way of teaching a subject. This way of teaching is, as the writer states, “being told what happened’ and is not a “learning [that] is a happening in itself” (The Inquiry Method 29). To me a learning that is happening in itself could mean that teachers need to conform to what was later stated in the article. For example: the writer suggested ideas like, a good teacher’s “basic mode of discourse with students is questioning” and “He encourages student-student interaction as opposed to student-teacher interaction” (The Inquiry Method 34).

Another view I thought was interesting was that at the beginning of the first chapter the writer states his point through a belief of man by the name of John Dewey. His belief is that “’we learn what we do’”. I was really curious of what this precisely might mean. I came to the conclusion that I still don’t know. However, I still have some ideas on what it could mean. The reason why I couldn’t really figure it out is because how do we just learn what we do cannot we “learn” from reading or just thinking or questioning in and of itself? I’m sorry but those are not necessarily action words and I think that was what he was going for in his article-towards the “actions” and such we perform in a classroom. However, I will admit that memorizing isn’t necessarily an “action” either. So, maybe he is right in some terms whatever they may be.

As you can tell his views have caused me to think and question a bit on this subject of education. I really do appreciate that you assigned us to read this work and the many others leading up to it. It has been somewhat thought provoking and has allowed me to see new perceptions.

In my research I have encountered different things that address things related to my topic: advances in technology. I haven't done a whole lot of research- less than I would have preferred. However, for this paper I was able to find the bare of what my topic is on and have learned of some ideas and inventions I didn't know existed.

The article titled "An illustrated speculative timeline of future technology and social change" gave me some exploration into my idea that perhaps technology could one day destroy us as a society. The beginning of my exploratory paper explains my views before my research. I stated that it is a possibility that advancements in technology could destroy our society. This article gave me an understanding of how.

One of the beginning paragraphs of the article states that it "appears most (perhaps all) technical civilizations in our galaxy destroy themselves not long after they reach our current stage" (J.R. Moonyham). With all the advancements in nuclear war technology it seems possible that the same thing could happen to our "technical" civilization. I hope that would not be the case. However, it is still quite frightening to think about. Could that possibly mean that our civilization might all be destroyed in 10 years, 5 years or even 2?

Another article I came across outlines specific things people have invented. While I was contemplating this article I came across a specific invention within the article that sparked my mind on what many recent inventions seem to have in common. They're all made to make things easier, more compact, and more accessible. For some reason to me that seems to be the basic purpose for creating all inventions of today. All else seems to fail.

Another thing that sparked my mind through this research is that with easily accessed technology comes addiction. However, I do not think all people get addicted to the games, movies, T.V. etc., but it definitely seems to make an impact on how our society spends their time. Look at Ipods. How many people own one? And how many people do you see in a day with headphones in their ears listening to them? Then there are the cell phones with text messengers. How many people have you seen in your day constantly sending text messages or talking on their phones? Point made clear.

My research has helped me learn a bit more on the subject of the advancements in technology. Through the knowledge I gained, I now know that there is that occasional possibility that through the technology we have our civilization could be destroyed. However, many enjoy the fact that technology today makes things more easily accessed.

Work Cited

J.R. Mooneyham. "An illustrated speculative timeline of future technology and social

         change, How advances in technology may reshape humanity." a- jrmooneyham.com-

         original. 2006. Nov. 20, 2006 <www.jrmooneyham.com/future_history_timeling.html >

I really enjoyed the reading, "Teaching as an Amusing Activity". Not to say that I enjoyed it in an entertaining way although it was, I did find it quite educational and thought provoking. I think he has some views that I believe are accurate. However, I have a few different ideas.  

One thing he speaks about is the T.V. program

That leads me to my belief that it may not be just because of entertainment why teachers are having entertainment come to the classroom. It could be that they just do not have anything else to do, so they use entertainment to take up the time. That seemed like the case in some of my experience. However, that is still bringing entertainment into classrooms, where, as the author states entertainment should not be.  

Another thing that the author mentioned was that students learn more if they do not watch, but read. I agree with this only because I think reading is a very good exercise for the mind. However, television can also be educational. It just depends on what you watch and how you take it. Meaning, how you interpret what is watched. Are you just watching it to be entertained or are you really trying to learn from the content? Allowing yourself to think on what is being said and learning from it can be very beneficial.  

I agree with basically what the author has said, but added a few of my ideas to some of his. As I stated before, this piece made me think and I liked that. I am glad I read this.  

I would like to talk about my research on the First Amendment. I have learned that debates are going on about what "constitutes impermissible speech."(1902). It has been interesting for me to find out how it has been applied in court cases, and just what people are saying about it.

I targeted my research towards the question: What debates are occurring around the country are and what exactly does the First Amendment mean? Although, I feel like I could do some more research, but, so far my research has helped me.

I have found that the debate on the right to Free Speech seemed to be common. In fact almost all of the research I have done has been targeted towards that First Amendment right. I have found that there seems to be difficult for it to be clearly defined.

In the case Rendon vs. Transportation Security Administration the Harvard law review stated that the panel seemed to do "little but sweep the First amendment concerns under the rug" (1902). Possibly that could have happened as a result of an "[un]clear substantive standard for what constitutes impermissible speech" (1902). Perhaps there shouldn't be a defining line for what free speech is. Instead the First amendment could be taken in to consideration with principle each time there cases about free speech. Meaning, they should have a definitive principle set so that the courts will be able to decide on each case with that set principle.

I am also somewhat surprised how differently high school students responded to 2 of the same survey given in two separate years concerning the First Amendment and its rights. The first year (2004) 57% of the students were pleased with it and upheld it. Then when given the 2^nd one, this year, 55% believed that there was too much freedom being given. Interesting, the opinion changed so dramatically in so short a time.

In my research I have been able to find several new thinks I didn't even know before. This opportunity to find out what is happening with our rights and what judges, scholars and others say and think of about it has been educational. There are indeed a lot of debates that go on around our country that involve First Amendment rights.

The topic that my research/annotated bibliography will be based on is the First Amendment. I will be researching scholarly articles that answer the question about what debates there are about it and what it means according to scholars. I have only written information about and researched two texts.

The first one was about how a man by the name of Michael Rendon swore at an airport screener. He used the first amendment to argue that he had rights. However, the panel did not accept that. They stated that he "'inferred' with security procedures in violation of [the] Transportation Security Administration (TSA) regulations." The writer brings up the question of what the panel meant when they said Rendon inferred-the question of what constitutes interfering.

He also goes on to say that they did not really handle it the best way. His opinion of the best way would be to set "notice[s] and scienter requirements". This would enable "First Amendment protections and security concerns" to be in more balance. Whereas the primary concern in this case was security. That ended up pushing aside the First amendment and bringing the two into an imbalance.

I believe that this article made me kind of think about if there are to be definitive standards set for what constitutes free speech and what those standards are. I personally think that it just depends upon each case alone. However, I do not disagree with the writer when he stated that notices and scienter requirements would be a good solution to these types of situations. It seemed like a good idea to me.

The second article I researched was just about how there is an association that in fact targets all that they do and their programs and such to making sure young adults will have their First Amendment rights protected. One of their functions is to help the young adults "to prepare and gather materials which will advise [them] of available services and support for resisting local pressure and community action designed to impair their rights." They are wholly based on making sure that their rights are not taken.

I personally like the idea that this whole organization has come up with. Especially because it is targeted towards young adults and we do need to have our educational rights maintained. If we have too many restrictions then it may make it harder for us to learn quicker. Meaning, it will take more time and effort to obtain a material if certain materials are restricted. That is one reason why I like it that there is a service out there that has the main purpose of trying their best to make sure us young adults have as many rights as are just for us to have      

I would like to write about what I think now about the speed limit. I wrote paper 2 about people going over the speed limit. I now have a slightly different opinion. I have changed my views since then and want to update you on what I think now about the subject.  

Now, I have not dramatically changed my opinion, but I have become more lenient. I now believe that yes, you should follow the speed limit, but now I'm more willing to go when I feel it is necessary. Not going 5 over the limit.

I also think that you should stay in the mainstream of things. Although, not always if the mainstream is really extreme. For example: if everyone was going 85 and the speed limit was 65 on a freeway, then I would go with my earlier suggestion. However, if everyone was going about 68-72 then I would possibly go that limit too since it's not quite so extreme.

The reason why I was able to change my views on this subject was because through writing the paper and other ways I was able to ask questions and decide what I really thought. Before, when I wrote the paper I was so stickler (and am still somewhat now) on going the speed limit. Most of the time, I was going the exact limit.

By writing the paper I was able to think of ways to solve the problem of others going over the speed limit in addition to some solutions to that. By doing that I came up with the best solution and that was to be an example. Then I got other ideas and decided that I didn't need to be that stickler on the speed limit. That is why I changed and became a little more lenient and came up with some ideas of the best way for me to handle that problem-to not be so stickler.

 I read a news article titled "State Sues Nursing Home". It came off of Star-Telegram.com. I didn't think it was as in depth as the scholarly article I read from week 5 of the journal entries. However, these articles did have some similarities.

This article was written in an approach to report/inform on a specific problem concerning a nursing home located in Richland Hills. This approach was different in that it was so fact based and seemed to be less opinionated. I also thought that the approach was to update also.

In the scholarly article I was able to hear what the writer thought about the topic, in the news article I got the idea that it was written based on how it really is not just how the author portrayed it. In the scholarly article the writer talked of her own experience. Whereas, in the news article it wasn't about the experiences of the author, but a report and facts about a particular subject based on what happened.

There was absutely no questions asked in the news article like the scholarly article had. When I read the scholarly article a series of questions were asked then explained by the author. The news article was talking about facts on the case of the nursing home being sued and just what the incident was that occurred leading up to the lawsuit.

This article is definitely targeted towards answering questions and informing. It talks about the reason for suing the nursing home. It even states the approx. amount of money the lawsuit is going to range from and how it will be determined.

This article was slightly interesting to me. I think that that was interesting that the nurses at the nursing home did not seem to listen to the patients daughter when she informed them of a problem the patient was going through. I would think they would have. Most should.

My response to this article was somewhat desired. I think it depends upon what you mean by desired. I guess it could mean my opinion of it. My opinion is that I did like the parts when the situation of what happened and such was explained, but then it started talking about a whole bunch of other stuff that wasn't really all that interesting to me. It was good mostly up until a certain point whereas the scholarly article was mostly interesting throughout.

I read an article called "A Silence that kills" and it's really true according to the article. The article states that tobacco kills about 178,000 women a year here, in the U.S. Although, there are several concerns about this there hasn't been as the article states "a way to give voice" to those families whose members and such are suffering from a death caused by tobacco use.

It states that also that this silence causes problems because the "public demand" would help in the effort to get programs together that would help prevent and help people quit the use of tobacco. I think that it was interesting when they stated that the government is also silent. It states that yes, the government is documenting deaths and such but they are not actively betting involved. I think that was interesting when it said that they are not actively involved. I just think that may be because they seem to say they'll do something and they don't always do it.

The article goes onto state that the place for practitioners for public health to start looking for ways to plan tobacco prevention would have to start at the bare facts. I believe this is true too because by knowing how many cases there are they will know how much effort or planning they really do need to put into all this-creating programs to help the public have a voice and therefore prevent future problems of tobacco use.

Another thing I thought was interesting that the article talked about was that they should involve the voice of smokers in this effort. This as I thought meant that they would involve them in the programs and therefore have evidence that the programs work, if indeed they will work. They will be able to as the article states, "support all Americans with evidence-based cessation services."

At the very end of the article I love how it states straight out with what actions should be taken in all of this. It is quite bold and I love how bold it is. They stated in an overview that as a "public health community" we should confront, communicate, demand action in these areas and on the topic of tobacco. At the very end it states that indeed "Our future depends on it."