Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Tow #30 Letter to a New APELC Student
Dear new APELC Student,
Congratulations on choosing to be a part of one of the most interesting yet intellectually challenging classes! To be perfectly honest, APELC is probably one of the hardest classes to get an A in. Throughout the year, you'll probably submit a couple papers you've scrutinized for hours and thought were perfect only to get a C (the summer essay) and stress over countless presentations, timed in-class essays and symposiums. However, the pay off is so worth it. Not only will your writing improve tremendously with all the practice you get throughout the year, you will also notice a change in your perspective, attitude and approach towards harder assignments and life in general. APELC is truly an AP class because it pushes you to your limits and then pushes you some more.Though it may seem a little intimidating at first, don't be scared! Be prepared to be a little stressed in the beginning of the year. Expect to be challenged. But also expect to see a huge growth in your analytical and writing skills after you put in all your effort. You can do it! Below are some tips that I hope will clear up some misconceptions about the class and help you start off the year on the right track.
Throughout the year every week, you will be assigned TOWs which are basically posts on your blog that you write after rhetorically analyzing an article or book. Though the weekly assignments are only 10 points they add up and every point helps in APELC so don't forget to do them! Also, find a wide variety of articles and actually spend some time rhetorically analyzing them because this practice actually helps so much on your essays. I have used the knowledge I gained from my TOW articles as examples multiple times in my in-class essays as well as the mock and AP exam.
In addition, in-class essays and take home essays are great practice and grade boosters! Time management may be a struggle when you first start writing your in-class essays but it'll get better throughout the year so don't stress. Just try to write as efficiently and concisely as you can. As for take home essays, never give up the opportunity to conference with Mr. Yost or Mrs. Pronko about a paper before submitting it. It always helps to have the people who are grading your essays look over them and give you a few suggestions before submission. It can save you quite a few points!
Lastly, when you're asked to take notes on a reading for class, always be prepared! Instead of taking pages of notes on a 20 page chapter, just print it out and highlight/ take notes on it. It's a lot easier. Also, there is almost always a discussion the next day. You want to be actively involved so make sure you know what you're talking about so you can contribute to the class discussion!
I hope this letter was beneficial and helped you understand APELC a little better. Just remember, you get out what you put into the class so do your best and I'm sure you'll enjoy it. Good Luck!
From,
Past APELC Student
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
Tow #29 World's Scariest Drug
Bank account bone dry? Woke up on a park bench disoriented and beaten? Have the sneaking suspicion that you spent the night in a zombie-like state emptying your bank accounts and home for Colombian drug lords? Or maybe, you don't remember anything at all.
Chances are, you may have been the unwitting victim of "the Devil's Breath", also known as Scopolamine. This is the scenario that the documentary, The World's Scariest Drug recounts this increasingly popular drug, that is sneakily sweeping the streets of Columbia. Known as one of the most dangerous drugs in the world, hence the title, Scopolamine has a reputation of being something like a "zombie drug" and is most often used to "rob, rape, or kill". The documentary follows Ryan Duffy's journey to Columbia to inform viewers about the deadliest drug in existence.
In the documentary, Ryan Duffy interviews multiple victims of Scopolamine who have had to live with the horrible aftermath. Each of the victims has still been profoundly affected today. One woman interviewed explains that what makes Scopolamine so scary is that recipients are completely conscious after being drugged but become completely at the will of their attacker and will do anything that they are told. After being drugged, she willingly lead her drugger to her apartment and gave him all her money and expensive camera items that he requested. It was not until the next day that she realized what had happened. Even so, the woman considered herself lucky as she was only administered a small dosage so could still recall some events. Often, the victims are not only robbed but raped and killed. Most victims are unable to remember anything that happened to them and have to live with the fact of not knowing for the rest of their lives.
Later, Ryan Duffy interviews a local drug dealer who specializes in Scopolamine to learn about how it is taken and where it is found. Turns out, the drug grows on a tree called Boracherro, a plant that populates much of the city and in the area where Duffy was staying, many grow right outside children's preschools. The plant once synthesized is made into a powder so potent that just briefly smelling it will allow the victim to fall under its spell. Drug lords easily use this to their advantage by administering it on small packets of paper that they slip to victims.
The documentary makes it clear the Scopolamine is one of the most dangerous drugs found in the world today due to its potency and chilling effect it has on the victim.
Monday, May 26, 2014
Tow #28 "Children of Rage: A Story of Abuse"
Beth wiggles around on the sofa with the energy of a six and a half year old girl who is forced to talk to an adult. She holds her head in her hands, rubs her nose, and pushes her brown locks of hair out of her eyes. Her sparkling blue eyes wander around the room as the interviewer questions her.
When the adult asks about the knife missing from the kitchen, Beth answers, "a big sharp one."
"What were you going to do with the knife Beth?"
"Kill John and Mommy and Daddy."
Representing one of the most traumatized cases of neglect and abuse, the adorable young girl, Beth stars in the TV documentary "Children of Rage: A Story of Abuse". The documentary introduces her as a child who has gone through much trauma at a young age, primarily because of the child sexual abuse and neglect she had to endure by her biological father. Because Beth was left so traumatized from this during the first five years of her life, the time crucial to learning affection and love, she was left with the inability to develop bonds with anyone and described as "without a conscience... capable of hurting or even killing someone without any remorse. Her adoptive family found her and her younger brother in this state and have to deal with severe complications to say the least. Beth regularly injures her younger brother and family pets and openly states that she wants to kill her family. Her family is forced to lock her in her room at night to protect themselves.
In contrast to other documentaries, this documentary is mainly organized as one lengthy interview conducted between the psychologist and Beth before treatment and then after treatment when Beth is moved to a house for kids like her. By interviewing the subject instead of taking pictures of home environment and narrating voice overs of her life, the documentary is able to allow the audience see Beth for themselves. The camera is focused on Beth the whole entire time, never the psychologist, sometimes even zooming into her face when she is answering a question, making it feel like Beth is staring directly at the audience. This perspective really gives the audience the full disturbing effect as the fetching little girl missing her two front teeth, looks deadpan into the camera and nonchalantly describes her plans to murder her family, lacking complete concern or remorse over her actions.
The message of the documentary finally becomes clear when the psychologist interviews Beth for the last time, years later after treatment at a facility for traumatized children like herself. As he asks Beth who she hurt the most, Beth replies "My parents. My brother. Me. It hurt me the most because when I hurt other people I hurt my good self"and dissolves into tears when asks how she feels about it. This appeals to the pathos of the viewers as the documentary captures the transformation that has occurred within Beth, who has turned into a caring and conscientious child. Beth represents the beacon of hope that other traumatized children similar to her, can find a better life through treatment, dedication and love.
When the adult asks about the knife missing from the kitchen, Beth answers, "a big sharp one."
"What were you going to do with the knife Beth?"
"Kill John and Mommy and Daddy."
Representing one of the most traumatized cases of neglect and abuse, the adorable young girl, Beth stars in the TV documentary "Children of Rage: A Story of Abuse". The documentary introduces her as a child who has gone through much trauma at a young age, primarily because of the child sexual abuse and neglect she had to endure by her biological father. Because Beth was left so traumatized from this during the first five years of her life, the time crucial to learning affection and love, she was left with the inability to develop bonds with anyone and described as "without a conscience... capable of hurting or even killing someone without any remorse. Her adoptive family found her and her younger brother in this state and have to deal with severe complications to say the least. Beth regularly injures her younger brother and family pets and openly states that she wants to kill her family. Her family is forced to lock her in her room at night to protect themselves.
In contrast to other documentaries, this documentary is mainly organized as one lengthy interview conducted between the psychologist and Beth before treatment and then after treatment when Beth is moved to a house for kids like her. By interviewing the subject instead of taking pictures of home environment and narrating voice overs of her life, the documentary is able to allow the audience see Beth for themselves. The camera is focused on Beth the whole entire time, never the psychologist, sometimes even zooming into her face when she is answering a question, making it feel like Beth is staring directly at the audience. This perspective really gives the audience the full disturbing effect as the fetching little girl missing her two front teeth, looks deadpan into the camera and nonchalantly describes her plans to murder her family, lacking complete concern or remorse over her actions.
The message of the documentary finally becomes clear when the psychologist interviews Beth for the last time, years later after treatment at a facility for traumatized children like herself. As he asks Beth who she hurt the most, Beth replies "My parents. My brother. Me. It hurt me the most because when I hurt other people I hurt my good self"and dissolves into tears when asks how she feels about it. This appeals to the pathos of the viewers as the documentary captures the transformation that has occurred within Beth, who has turned into a caring and conscientious child. Beth represents the beacon of hope that other traumatized children similar to her, can find a better life through treatment, dedication and love.
Today Beth Thomas is a Neonatal Intensive Care Nurse.
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
Tow #27 TOW Reflection
In the beginning of the year I'll admit that I didn't find the weekly TOWs very beneficial to me. However, I've come to realize that doing TOW posts throughout the year has been really valuable to me in the long run. I can see improvement in not only my analytical skills but the arrangement and composition of my writing as a whole.
In the beginning of the year I feel like I was more summarizing the author's purpose rather than analyzing how the author presented his/her purpose or the effectiveness of the rhetorical devices on the readers. In addition, as the year progressed, it gradually became easier for me to pinpoint the author's purpose and the rhetorical devices/strategies used to achieve the purpose as well as integrate better transitions throughout my writing. The articles that I chose to write about also changed from being from a narrow area to broader spectrum. This ultimately helped me a lot because by the end of the year, during in-class timed essays and the mock, I was able to recall multiple specific examples to use for the prompts. The practice I got from quickly skimming the articles I chose every week also benefitted me during the actual AP test. I was able to save a lot of time by efficiently skimming through each of the passages to catch the main purposes.
One thing that I could probably still work on is writing about the most effective rhetorical strategies. Sometimes I still find myself picking the easiest or the most obvious devices used in the writing but I know that the ones I see first in the article may not necessarily prove the author's purpose the best.
Overall, the TOWs were a great source of practice for me to hone my analytical skills and prepare for the in-class essays and AP exam.
In the beginning of the year I feel like I was more summarizing the author's purpose rather than analyzing how the author presented his/her purpose or the effectiveness of the rhetorical devices on the readers. In addition, as the year progressed, it gradually became easier for me to pinpoint the author's purpose and the rhetorical devices/strategies used to achieve the purpose as well as integrate better transitions throughout my writing. The articles that I chose to write about also changed from being from a narrow area to broader spectrum. This ultimately helped me a lot because by the end of the year, during in-class timed essays and the mock, I was able to recall multiple specific examples to use for the prompts. The practice I got from quickly skimming the articles I chose every week also benefitted me during the actual AP test. I was able to save a lot of time by efficiently skimming through each of the passages to catch the main purposes.
One thing that I could probably still work on is writing about the most effective rhetorical strategies. Sometimes I still find myself picking the easiest or the most obvious devices used in the writing but I know that the ones I see first in the article may not necessarily prove the author's purpose the best.
Overall, the TOWs were a great source of practice for me to hone my analytical skills and prepare for the in-class essays and AP exam.
Saturday, May 3, 2014
Tow #26 "Revenge, My Lovely"
Reading goals: Skim through article quickly and understand main purpose
Writing goals: Efficiently identify author's argument
In this weeks issue of NYTimes, the author, Jo Nesbø analyzes the human's natural thirst for revenge. He states that revenge has always been portrayed as being a "barbaric, shortsighted and pointless instinct" that we are taught by society to resist. But Nesbø argues that in reality, it is actually perfectly logical behavior and shows that we have the capability for abstract thought. In the article Nesbø uses analogies and rhetorical questions to prove this point.
Nesbø introduces the concept of revenge to his audience by using an analogy to an antelope. He states that if an antelope's calves are attacked, she will fight back to protect her young, but only to a certain point - until the calf has died and it would be pointless to keep on attacking the aggressor. Nesbø then compares the human response to the same situation. While antelopes would not consider pursuing the aggressor after they consider it futile, humans Nesbø writes, would exact revenge in hopes preventing a future attack on their offspring in the future. By using an analogy, Nesbø is able to distinguish between an animals shortsighted instinct and a human's revenge- their capacity to think about the abstract future.
In addition to the animal- human comparison, Nesbø also uses rhetorical questions throughout his article in order to suggest a new idea to the reader. The placement of rhetorical questions at the end of paragraphs offer transition to the next paragraph as they are introduced to a new perspective on the issue. Questions like "... is it the case that we go along with a legal system we don't think meets our emotional need for retribution?" also allow the author to directly address the readers.
Nesbø effectively justifies the human nature to seek revenge through the use of simple analogies and and rhetorical questions.
Writing goals: Efficiently identify author's argument
In this weeks issue of NYTimes, the author, Jo Nesbø analyzes the human's natural thirst for revenge. He states that revenge has always been portrayed as being a "barbaric, shortsighted and pointless instinct" that we are taught by society to resist. But Nesbø argues that in reality, it is actually perfectly logical behavior and shows that we have the capability for abstract thought. In the article Nesbø uses analogies and rhetorical questions to prove this point.
Nesbø introduces the concept of revenge to his audience by using an analogy to an antelope. He states that if an antelope's calves are attacked, she will fight back to protect her young, but only to a certain point - until the calf has died and it would be pointless to keep on attacking the aggressor. Nesbø then compares the human response to the same situation. While antelopes would not consider pursuing the aggressor after they consider it futile, humans Nesbø writes, would exact revenge in hopes preventing a future attack on their offspring in the future. By using an analogy, Nesbø is able to distinguish between an animals shortsighted instinct and a human's revenge- their capacity to think about the abstract future.
In addition to the animal- human comparison, Nesbø also uses rhetorical questions throughout his article in order to suggest a new idea to the reader. The placement of rhetorical questions at the end of paragraphs offer transition to the next paragraph as they are introduced to a new perspective on the issue. Questions like "... is it the case that we go along with a legal system we don't think meets our emotional need for retribution?" also allow the author to directly address the readers.
Nesbø effectively justifies the human nature to seek revenge through the use of simple analogies and and rhetorical questions.
Sunday, April 27, 2014
Tow #25 "The Koch Attack on Solar Energy"
Reading goals: clearly identify purpose of article
Writing goals: concise thesis and strong arguments supported by article
In this weeks Sunday Review issue in NYtimes, The Editorial Board wrote an article about the Koch industries attack on the nation's shift towards renewable energy. Koch industries are heavily involved in the manufacturing and distribution of petroleum, chemicals and energy. They see the expanding solar panel businesses as a threat to them and recently have found a new tax on solar panels they support to make renewable energy less appealing to the public. Through the use of statistics and short, terse sentence structure authors clearly portray The Koch industries as a menace to an advancement that "the country needs: solar energy panels".
The Editorial Board first uses statistics to convince the public why it is important to move towards renewable energy sources. Citing the benefit of renewables for the economy as well as environmental reasons, the authors state, "more than 143,000 now work in the solar industry...43 states require utilities to buy excess power generated by consumers with solar arrays." By using relevant statistics, the article makes it obvious that we as a country are already implementing renewable energy sources and look to increase this number in the near future to the benefit of the public.
Furthermore, they demonize the Koch industries by explaining that the Koch brothers are supporting a new tax that charges advocates for the use of solar panels each month by describing their actions in terse sentences. These effective pauses allow the author to emphasize the diction and display a sense of urgency- that what the Koch industries are doing is detrimental to the environment and people.
Through the use of statistics and terse sentence structure, The Editorial Board of NYtimes aims to call out and inform the public of the Koch industries actions and encourage them to support renewable energy in the future.
Writing goals: concise thesis and strong arguments supported by article
In this weeks Sunday Review issue in NYtimes, The Editorial Board wrote an article about the Koch industries attack on the nation's shift towards renewable energy. Koch industries are heavily involved in the manufacturing and distribution of petroleum, chemicals and energy. They see the expanding solar panel businesses as a threat to them and recently have found a new tax on solar panels they support to make renewable energy less appealing to the public. Through the use of statistics and short, terse sentence structure authors clearly portray The Koch industries as a menace to an advancement that "the country needs: solar energy panels".
The Editorial Board first uses statistics to convince the public why it is important to move towards renewable energy sources. Citing the benefit of renewables for the economy as well as environmental reasons, the authors state, "more than 143,000 now work in the solar industry...43 states require utilities to buy excess power generated by consumers with solar arrays." By using relevant statistics, the article makes it obvious that we as a country are already implementing renewable energy sources and look to increase this number in the near future to the benefit of the public.
Furthermore, they demonize the Koch industries by explaining that the Koch brothers are supporting a new tax that charges advocates for the use of solar panels each month by describing their actions in terse sentences. These effective pauses allow the author to emphasize the diction and display a sense of urgency- that what the Koch industries are doing is detrimental to the environment and people.
Through the use of statistics and terse sentence structure, The Editorial Board of NYtimes aims to call out and inform the public of the Koch industries actions and encourage them to support renewable energy in the future.
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
IRB #4 Gulp
After reading two books from Mary Roach's series: Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife and Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers, I decided to choose chose Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal as my next IRB book. I really enjoy her spunky twist on scientific stories and dry sense of humor so I'm excited to discover the answers to these quirky questions: "How much can you eat before your stomach bursts? Why doesn't the stomach digest itself? Can wine tasters really tell a $10 bottle from a $100 bottle? Why is crunchy food so appealing? and Can constipation kill you? Did it kill Elvis?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)