Tow #29

Dear APELC student,
 Welcome to the hardest year of your high school career and one of the most academically challenging courses you will ever take. This class is great for strengthening your weaknesses and reinforcing your strengths. Although this class is going to be challenging, you are going to get a lot out of it, as long as you keep up on top of your work. You are going to get what you put into this class. So don't be discouraged if the first marking period you get your first C, or for those of you who are straight A students, if you get your first B in the first marking period, hooray for you! I know I was devastated getting my first C ever in the first marking period, but that did not stop me from working hard during the duration of the course and I brought my grade up to a B. It's even possible to get an A (hard, but not impossible). This course is challenging at first because you are transitioning from a 10th grade class to a college class. This is what AP English is- a college class. However, don't let that scare you, this is an experience and a class you want to take because you will get a lot out of it. You will write a lot and chances are you will not always get a 9, but if you sit down with Mr. Yost and Ms. Pronko to conference before and after your essays, you will definitely see improvement. This class is not a sprint, but a whole marathon. It is important to always come to Mr. Yost or Ms. Pronko for anything regarding the class because they will always help you out if you are struggling because they are extremely understanding no matter what the situation is.
The most important thing in this course is to keep writing. You will do a lot of writing in this course whether it be for a timed essay or a weekly TOW and you'll notice that the more you write, the easier it will be to excel in this class. You will also learn a lot about rhetoric, so make sure that you really pay attention to that when you read and write.
Always keep up with your work and never leave it for the last minute. Mr. Yost is really good at giving the week's worth of homework in advanced, and sometimes even a couple weeks in advanced, so timing should not be a problem, even for those of you taking several AP's like myself. It is just very important in this class, as well as in any of your other classes to disperse and manage your time efficiently in order to excel.
When you are having a hard time in the class or feel like you can't bear it anymore, go talk to Mr. Yost or Ms. Pronko who are always willing to help and push you to get you to where you need to be. Mr. Yost always offers extra practice, IE's, and even after school time to help you with whatever you need. So extra help is never a problem as long as you are willing to do it. Mr. Yost is not going to let you fail the course and if he sees how hard you are trying, he is definitely going to help you get better. However, it is important that you keep up with your responsibilities and put in a lot of effort and hard work into this class because that is the only way to succeed.
So to sum this all up, don't be discouraged. You made a wise decision in taking this class. It is a very challenging class, but is it a class that will greatly help you in the future with your writing, and even all the non-fiction works that we read and analyze, will provide you a lot of insight and knowledge in the world. So it is not only writing skills that you learn, you can get really well-rounded information from this class. You must always be on top of your work and make sure to put in a lot of effort. Always come to Mr. Yost or Ms. Pronko in times of struggle because they will always be there. Whether it be editing your paper before it's due, or giving you tips on how to improve in the class, they are always there! So try to enjoy your junior year, and never give up!
Best of luck,
Elizabeth Sitkovetsky! 

Tow #28: secret servicemen

Recently, I watched a documentary on secret servicemen on netflix. The documentary was very informative and I learned a lot from it. The documentary really stressed how important the job and duties of the secret servicemen are. One of the claims that it made was saying that the job of a secret servicemen is one of the most honorable ones to have. I strongly agree with this statement based on my knowledge about the secret servicemen and the documentary.

First of all, the secret servicemen have a strict honor code and one job. Their one job is to protect the President no matter what happens. They go forth with this job knowing that they have to sacrifice themselves in order to protect the President and make sure that nothing happens to him. Risking their own safety and potentially lives (in some circumstances), in order to save the President of the United States is about as honorable as it gets. They are being completely selfless and sacrificing themselves in order to make sure that there is no harm done to the President. That takes a lot of courage and dedication.

The secret servicemen are extremely dedicated to the President and their job. Everything is kept top secret, and the secret servicemen go to big extremes to prove their dedication to the President. For example, prior to the JFK assassination, one of his secret servicemen had an argument with him about riding in an open car. This shows the dedication this secret service agent had because he knew that riding in an open car can potentially endanger the President, so he went into arguing him and advising him not to. Yes, it does not seem really respectful to argue with the President, however, this just shows this man's dedication to the President and his safety, making him more honorable than ever.

The secret servicemen also know a lot of information about the President that is not open to the public. This means that everything they know must be kept secret and to themselves. This gives them honor and an honor code to abide by because they know information that is critical to the figurehead of this country and the President relies on them to keep this information secret.

With the work and duties that the secret servicemen have to perform, they are one of the most honorable people, making their job extremely honorable to have. They dedicate themselves in order to protect the President. That takes a lot of courage for regular human beings to do.

Tow 28: Secrets of the Secret Servicement

Recently, I watched a documentary called “Secrets of the Secret Service.” I watched this because politics and everything that has to do with the government interests me and the secret servicemen are the ones who sign up to protect the President of the United States at all costs. I wanted to know more about how exactly they do their job. This documentary was narrated by Rob Naughton. Naughton narrates for other documentaries, such as Treasure Quest (2009) and various others. The documentary opens up by talking about the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy in order to show how his assassination would forever change the secret service, preventing anything like this from ever happening again. The documentary talks about the secret service and the importance of their job; showing the world how the secret service works, and the technologies it uses to protect the President of the United States.

The purpose of this documentary was to definitely give insight to the public about how the secret servicemen do their job and how protected the president really is. This was achieved by first giving a definition of the secret servicemen and who they are, “The secret service does many things like safeguard our currency, protect important U.S. officials and foreign visitors, but its most important task is to protect the President of the United States.” Then, the documentary introduced retired secret service agents, Joseph Funk, and Joseph Petro, who gave testimonies about the job and how much pressure it really is because it really provides insight on how these men will go to all costs to protect the president. A lot of facts were given and I thought this was really effective because these were actual secret servicemen who were very credible because they have done their job in protecting the president and they gave testimonies on how they did it. It really helped me learn about how the secret servicemen really achieve their job.

            The filmmakers used a lot of 3-D models in order to show the protection the president has. A 3-D model was used to demonstrate the bulletproof glass that the president’s car has. After that, to make it more credible, they had a secret service agent; shoot this same bulletproof glass from 20 feet in order to show how durable it really is. This really enhanced the film’s credibility because the world did not just hear about how severely the president is protected: the world got to witness just how this protection works. However, what made the documentary really interesting and credible is that the makers did not just talk about the durability of the president’s limo; they talked about the president’s house, helicopter, and Boeing. Furthermore, testimonies from Mark Burton, CEO and President of the company who makes these bulletproof cars were given to provide further insight as to how these cars were made. The world was given insight on how carefully and strategically all of this technology was constructed in order to serve its one intended purpose: to protect the president.  

Footage of the Presidents and layouts of the secret servicemen showed exactly how vulnerable these men are and how honorable they are to sacrifice their lives in order to do their job and protect the president. I thought that this film was very effective in proving the great extents these secret servicemen go to protecting the president, and really this film provided the world insight as to how these men actually protect the president with the technology they have.  However, I do not really think it was smart to give out so much detail and information about the secret servicemen and the president because this knowledge can be used against them by assassins, so although a lot of information was left classified, I was amazed at the amount of information actually given out to the public. Although, I can understand that the minor purpose of this was to kind of warn any individuals who plan on attacking the president, that the president is really secure and any attempts will not go through.

Tow #27: Reflection Tow

I've read Everyone Loves a Loser, TOW #3 from the first marking period, When Police Enter a Home, TOW #9 from the second, and How to Help the Homeless, TOW #18, from the third marking period. In rereading these TOWs, I've noticed a lot of improvement from the first marking period, to the third.

I noticed that when I first started writing TOWS, it sounded more like a summary of the article, followed by a specific requirement of criteria that we had to do. It almost sounded like a checklist. It did not flow very well and sounded abrupt. I also noticed that I used a lot of quotations at first, however, as my TOWs went on, I used less specific quotations, but I really talked about the rhetorics and how the editorials worked together and the purpose they really achieved. I think I had a problem identifying the purpose in a lot of my earlier TOWs, but that got better the more TOWs I wrote, and the more I wrote and analyzed in general in this class.

I feel like I really mastered making my TOWs flow together instead of just sounding like a plain checklist. They really sound more like a blogpost now. I also really mastered identifying rhetorics and not just "ethos, logos, pathos" as I started out in my first TOWs. I really analyzed and took a look at the style of writing and it's purpose. 

I could still strive to improve my diction and make it sound more efficient at times. My writing isn't always the best, but it has been improving. I need to make my writing more free and stick to developing it more instead of just worrying about taking care of a checklist to better my grade. I think I could improve by writing more TOWs on various different topics. Sometimes the topics I chose were very alike and I think it would be more interesting to write about various different issues. 

I did benefit from the TOWs because this was extra writing practice for me and a chance to identify purpose, rhetorical strategies, and the most important "So What?" in the text. Like what is the purpose of all of this? I really think that TOWs helped me realize this. However, I do not think that the TOWs really reflected much on my essays in class because I felt that the essays in class were more stressed than the TOWs which seemed more relaxed, also they were a complete different and informal style, so I do think that if the purpose of them was to improve writing and making it a reflection upon class essays, they need to be more like class essays and a little less informal. 

Tow #26: Death Penalty

This political cartoon, by Chip Bok is very ironic. The lawyer is walking up to the criminal who is about to be executed and says "Good News! I Got You Off Lethal Injection." This has to do with the debate on the death penalty and whether it is humane or not. This has been going on for a while, and this political cartoon just illustrates the side explaining that no matter how you kill someone, there is still no humane way to do it. However, this cartoon really has to do with the recent death of Clayton Lockett, a convicted murder, whose lethal injection had gone horribly wrong. Instead of passing out, Lockett suffered 43 minutes in agony before he died of a pronounced heart attack. The lethal injection drugs combination failed.

Chip Bok, who is an American editorial cartoonist for the Tampa Bay Times, had a purpose in mind when creating this cartoon. He wanted to show the irony that even if the death penalty will not involve a lethal injection, any other way of killing someone is not human. Even though this lawyer said that this criminal is not going to face lethal injection, she is still going to be hung. Therefore, she is still going to die.

This political cartoon is very ironic because even though the lawyer protected his client from the lethal injection because it could have gone horribly wrong, he still did not protect her from the death penalty because she is still going to be hung. It's just like saying that "you're just going to die a different way." There is no humane and just way to kill a person and this really appeal to pathos because even though criminals should be punished, would the death penalty and cruel ways to execute it serve justice for the people lost? I do believe very much so that criminals should be punished, locked away for life, but the death penalty will only be two wrongs that do not make a right.

I thought that this cartoon was very simple and to the point artistically, however emotionally it sparked a lot of feelings because even though it is a criminal that is facing the death penalty, two wrongs do not make a right. I just feel like criminals should be locked away forever, I do not really see any justice in the death penalty because two wrongs do not make a right and you cannot undo the crimes committed, by killing the criminal, you are only making it worse. I think that what happened in the Lockett case was extremely inhumane and unethical because it was a long and painful suffering that the guilty had to endure just because the drug was not proper. I think that criminals should be severely punished, but not by lethal injection or the death penalty, they should be deprived of their freedom, kept from inflicting harm on others.

Tow #25: China and the Toll of Smoking

This informative editorial was about China's tobacco problem. "More than 300 million people in China are smokers, and about one million of them are killed each year." That is a high number, showing the devastating effects of tobacco. This editorial talks about the World Health Organization urging Chinese authorities to use graphic warnings of the harm cigarettes cause, right on the packages. This was written in context of China's problem with tobacco, urging that something must be done in order to help reduce smoking and all the health risks associated with it.

This editorial, written by the New York Times Editorial board was extremely informative, considering it was written by a group of highly educated and well-rounded journalists. This editorial really provided a lot of statistics and that served the purpose of illustrating the severity of the tobacco problem in China. "Cigarettes kill about one million Chinese each year. That number could reach three million by 2030, if the rate of smoking is not reduced." This statistic alone attacks the audience's logic and emotion because it helps the audience, (Chinese authorities), to really understand the crisis in their country, urging them to do something.

All of these statistics mainly appeal to emotion because Chinese authorities can see the high numbers of smokers and understand that they need to do more than just write "Smoking is Hazardous to Your Health" on the box, they need to physically put vivid imagery of oral cancer, lung cancer, heart disease, in order for the Chinese to think twice about buying a pack of cigarettes. If these images would be put on the packaging, the Chinese would be disgusted and chances are they would restrain from buying cigarettes. 

This editorial also targets the Chinese authorities, calling them out on the fact that although they are making money on selling tobacco products, the money that they are spending on medical costs for tobacco related illnesses, outweigh the revenue that they are making. "7 percent to 10 percent of total annual central government revenues" does not make it okay for a million people to be dying each year. It also doesn't make it effective in terms of the costs that Chinese authorities will have to pay in treating these people.

I personally think that this editorial had a good central argument and backed it with a lot of evidence and statistics. I think it really drove home the point of all the negative effects of smoking and why there should be graphics on cigarette packaging to prevent smoking.  

Tow #24: Unbroken section one

I started reading my IRB, Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand. This book starts with giving a detailed account of Louis Zamperini and goes through his whole childhood. Louis was a kid who started going down the wrong path, but his brother, Pete, caught onto this and reversed his life for him. Pete knew that Louis had a lot of potential in him, so he set really high goals for him. Louis became a track star, and soon he joined the United States Air Force.

I think the purpose of this first section of the book was for the author to introduce to the reader Louis Zamperini, a World War II hero and show how his childhood changed him and shaped him into the hero that he became. It made the audience, war veterans, or anyone interested in reading a biography of a true war hero, understand better Louis's life and how he got into the Air Force.

However, in reading more about the author, the real purpose that Hillenbrand wrote this book was to show a parallel between Zamperini and herself. Hillenbrand suffers from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and when she was diagnosed, it was one of the hardest things she ever had to go through. Doing every day activities such as walking up and down the stairs, or even walking to the mailbox and back, Hillenbrand found herself extremely tired and needed to rest. At this point, she was just about ready to give up. She then heard the story of Seabiscuit and wrote a book on it because of how inspired she was. Unbroken reflects the same idea of survival, resilience, and redemption. In writing this book, Zamperini becomes an inspiration for Hillenbrand, giving her an example of faith. Her writing is a coping strategy for her disease.

The first section of the book uses many rhetorical devices, such as vivid description. Hillenbrand does a good job describing Louis Zamperini and his childhood, providing events in his life, and giving a good description of the people and influences in his life. This is really effective in the sense that this really helps the reader understand and picture Louis and his life. The first section also includes many pictures of Louis and his family. This is really effective because even though the author provides many descriptors, these descriptors are made more powerful when the author provides real life photographs of Louis and his family. This really helps the reader understand that Louis is really and this is really empowering because this is not just some made up story, but a true story of a real hero whose pictures are provided in the novel.

This book was written in the context of remembering war heroes and I personally think that so far from what I am reading, Laura Hillenbrand has done an amazing job introducing Louis, really giving the readers a sense of who he was, writing a great chronology of his life events starting from birth. I also think that this book's diction is really empowering and the pictures in the book because they really show the virtues that Louis poses of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption.

IRB Intro Marking Period 4: Unbroken

For the final quarter, I want to read the biography, Unbroken. Unbroken, by Laura Hillenbrand, is a non-fiction account of a story of Louis Zamperini, a World War II hero who survived in the middle of the ocean on a raft for 47 days, only to be taken in into a prisoner's of war camp by the japanese. This is a story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption.
I am very interested in reading this book because I have never read a story about World War II and this seems really interesting and I also love history so this is going to be really interesting.
By reading this I hope to gain appreciation for those who sacrificed their lives fighting for this country, and I hope to learn the virtues and values that Louis displayed. I want this book to teach me that there are worse things in life than my small problems and that really I need to look at the bigger picture in life. 

Tow #23: A is for App!

This political cartoon, created by Cal Grondahl, who is the staff cartoonist for the Utah Stander Examiner is extremely controversial because it exemplifies how the use of technology has been interfering with school and teaching. It illustrates how some teachers do not even "need" to teach because technology does everything for them. With the advancements of the apple products, more and more classrooms are becoming technologically advanced, thus creating less purpose to instructors. The context is the development over technology and its influence on school.

This cartoon was written for everyone in society to become aware of the technology problem that is going on and how teachers are not doing their jobs as much because technology is taking over and that is interfering with learning.

This cartoon has a hyperbole in it because it is a bit of an exaggeration...teachers are not actually becoming useless and letting the students use technology to learn. While technology is being used more for educational purposes, teachers still teach, they just incorporate technology into their lessons which is actually really effective. 

The teacher looks distraught in the cartoon and that kind of shows that she is exhausted of this technology and the students look very confused, which shows that they really need some teaching guidance. 

At the top of the wall it says "...Standard Examiner," which shows that the teacher actually does have a purpose, but she does not want to do anything because what is the point if there is so much technology and kids nowadays are learning so much from it, what is the point of having teachers anymore?

Personification of the tablet is happening because the teacher says "Your tablet is your teacher; I'll be in the teacher's lounge." This is personifying the tablet signifying that it can do everything that the teacher can. I also think this shows that teachers are becoming lazier with technology.

However, I disagree with this whole political cartoon because technology is incorporated with teaching and teachers use it to make learning easier and more understandable. Teachers still teach and they are not becoming lazier because most teachers are not letting technology take over. I really disagree and think this cartoon is ineffective. 

Tow #22 :Doctors, psychologists battle over prescribing privileges

This editorial is in context of the Illinois Senate bill, passed last spring that would allow psychologists with advanced degrees and training to prescribe medication. This topic is highly debated and this editorial gives us the overview of two sides of the argument and from reading it, it can be gathered that many people do not think that psychologists have sufficient experience and clinical practice in order to prescribe medication.
This editorial is very informative, and the purpose is to show whether or not psychologists should have the right to prescribe medication or not. This is targeted at the whole public because this is a medical issue and can affect a lot of people.
This editorial gives a lot of testimonies to back up their information, "We don't doubt that both sides seek what they believe is best for patients.
State Rep. John Bradley, chief sponsor of the bill in the House, tells us that his constituents in southern Illinois too often lack access to mental health services. "I think there is an opportunity to expand care, but I also think we need to be careful about making sure the right safeguards are in place to make sure it is good-quality care." This shows the state representative's neutral perspective and I think that this is highly affective because it is making people think of both sides of the issue. Also this editorial has a lot of testimonies for doctors that are psychiatrists and what they think about psychologists being able to prescribe medication. I think that this is good that a psychiatrist's opinion is included because they do prescribe medication for mentally ill patients and this is their area of expertise so their testimonies are very accurate and valid. The argument is also affective in presenting an opposition because it talks about how the "Thresholds" (largest community in mental health in Illinois), opposed the bill and the "National Alliance on Mental Illness" did too. That kind of shows the perspective that not all of Illinois is neutral on the issue because there are a lot of risks involved with passing that kind of act so people want to be precautious
because after all this is patient safety.
I personally believe that this argument was very effective in that it kind of presented neutral sides of the argument at first introducing people to the issue, but then it kind of showed both sides to the argument. The most effective was the ethos because there was a lot of credibility and testimonies and facts to support this very interesting and informative editorial.

 

TOW #21: High Mortality From Alzheimer's Disease

With my new job at Marshall's being involved in donating money for Alzheimer's research, I came across a very informative article about Alzheimer's and how this disease causes more deaths than statistics actually show. The purpose of this article was to inform people about how highly deadly this disease is and with all the tolls that it costs, it should be "imperative" to enhance research to find treatments and cures.

The editorial gives many statistics, first starting out with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's estimations that Alzheimer's caused almost 84,000 deaths in the United States. After giving these statistics, the editors introduce a new study done by researchers at the Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, that states that Alzheimer's is really the underlying cause of more than 500,000 deaths in the United States. The editorial does a really good comparison showing the difference of the statistics and showing that intensive and continuous research can inform us more about the disease. The editorial also does a nice job in describing the way the study is conducted and how the researchers come about the high death toll that Alzheimer's cause.

This editorial really appeals to emotions because after reading this people are going to want to do something because of the statistics the article provides. For example, "Those numbers would catapult Alzheimer’s from the sixth-leading cause of death in the United States to the third, behind heart disease and cancer." This makes people want to invest in more research to find treatments and cures for Alzheimer's because it really affects a lot of people and has devastating affects.

The editors who wrote this seem to be very credible because they use a lot of studies and statistics, however, I feel that they should have had more examples and more than two studies to show the tolls Alzheimer's brings. I also feel like they could have included more about the costs and ways that people can contribute to fund the research for the cure. 

TOW #20: Visual Text: Minimum Wage Raise

Goals: I hope to pick out a challenging and intriguing cartoon as my visual text.

I want this cartoon to be controversial and have rhetorical devices that can help me identify the purpose.

I also want it to be on a topic that I am passionate about.

I want this TOW to flow and be more like a short essay rather than just a small blogpost.

I also don’t want to list the requirements for the TOW, but make them sound more natural.

Earlier this year, President Barack Obama gave the State of the Union Address. Typically, the President of the United States delivers this address annually. In his address, President Barack Obama announced that he would like to raise this minimum wage from $7.25 to $9 an hour. This has caused a lot of controversy, especially amongst the Republicans. In a current political cartoon, Khalil Bendib, an Algerian artist and political cartoonist, illustrates the Republican point of view on the proposed minimum wage raise in order to show America the Republican's view how ineffective raising the minimum wage would be. Bendib is trying to appeal to the American public in order to make them realize the negatives that the minimum wage boost would bring.

When looking at the cartoon, the first thing that catches the eye are the elephant in suits. All these elephants look distraught in order to symbolize how awful raising the minimum wage would be. The elephant is actually the Republican symbol and when looking closely, one of the elephants has the acronym "GOP" written on his pant leg. This stands for "Grand Old Party" which is otherwise known as the Republican party. All four of these elephant are bringing up issues with Obama advocating to raise the minimum wage. One of them talks about how raising the minimum wage has been done before and this immediately questions the intended affect of the minimum wage boost because if the minimum wage has been raised before and still there were problems in the economy, this makes the American Public question whether raising the minimum wage is really effective or not. 

The second elephant talks about how the minimum wage should be less, not more. This is appealing to the logic of the Republican point of view because they highly disagree with raising the minimum rage and if logically thinking, minimum wage really is less not more. This makes the American public realize yet another fault with the raise of the minimum wage.

The third elephant really hits close to home for a lot of America's people because it says that money isn't the reward, jobs are. This appeals to the emotions of the audience because a lot of people in the United States are currently unemployed and raising the minimum wage would actually cause unemployment to go up so looking at this cartoon, people are going to understand that raising the minimum wage is really not a good thing. 

Finally, the last elephant is just a racist attempt of the Republicans to target the President. This mainly has to do with the fact that they believe that he is not a good president and implementing the boost of the minimum wage is a horrible idea. 

When looking at the speech bubbles, one notices that some words are specifically bolded. I think that the author did this in order to show the strong contempt of the Republicans against raising the minimum wage. Also, I think this was done in order to highlight the issues that raising the minimum wage would bring.

Personally, I thought that this was a really effective cartoon not only from a biased point of view, but because it had a lot of symbolism, while also including the actual issues that raising the minimum wage would bring. It did not merely just list all of them, but they were short- paraphrased issues that could be clearly understood not just from the Republican point of view, but anyone in the American public can look at this cartoon and understand the downfall of raising the minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage is the product of a bad idea with good intentions.