Critical Thinking:

"Mind is open to change based on additional information and data or reasoning, which contradicts beliefs."

I believe this applies to me because of my work reading Henry IV and in Cuborica. In the discussions we have been having about Henry IV my mind has changed based on the points that other people in the class brought up. For example in a class discussion we had on March 26tha point had been brought up that Falstaff and Henry were both father figures for Hal but in different ways. When that point was brought up I originally sharply disagreed that either were really father figures. However, when Tom brought up that a father figure can be someone you consciously choose to be like or not to be like and Estelle brought in that a father figure she believes is someone who has some element of control over their child I began to see how much of a father figure Henry is. Since up until that point in the reading Hal had seemingly been trying to defy his father and not be like him, Hal's actions of going to his father and promising him that he will take his responsibility shows that Henry does have an element of control over Hal and perhaps does want to be like his father in some ways. This additional insight that Tom and Estelle gave changed my mind and gave me further insight into the relationship between Hal and his father. Another example is how my mind changed about Hal after seeing the movie clip of him in Henry V. After seeing that clip and seeing how he had to prove himself because he had always been a buffoon to the people of the court. I had originally thought that everything Hal said in his speech was true and that he really did have a masterful plan and his relationship with Falstaff and his father was just part of that plan. However, after seeing this clip and getting this additional information about how Hal acts later on I no longer believe Hal when he said his plan. I think after seeing how unsteady ground he is on and how the people in the court expect him to prove himself and are not simply happy that he has transformed his ways shows that his plan was a teenager trying to take control over a situation that he had no control over to begin with. Another example is with Cuborica. In Cuborica I originally thought that seceding was not going to be even a possible route for the Boreacans because we laid out what we wanted which was equal say in a government set up with a Congress and a large percent of the oil profits. I believed that we would work with the Japicas in a peaceful way to get what we wanted and hold over their heads the fact that we could secede. However, my mind changed about seceding when I got the additional information that the Japicas had no intention of including us as part of the government despite the fact that they set up the Kerner Commission. When my group and I found out that none of our requests would be made we changed our course and formed our own country. Another example in Cuborica is when my party and I made the conscious decision not to include Jacque Blaque in our state of the union speech. I along with my group believed that it was the right thing to do to keep him out because he had not been mentioned in President Will's speech. However, after having told the Cubnians to bomb the embassy in Aforia the Japicas found evidence that we could be involved which was the Boreacan association with Blaque. After thinking about how they used our own evidence association against us as a group we realized we made a mistake in not disassociating ourselves with Blaque when we had the chance. In order to continue to keep my mind open to change based on additional information I plan to continue to contribute more in class discussions. I noticed this quarter that the times when I contributed more I got more out of the discussions and kept myself more open to what other people were saying in response to me or contradicting me. It is easy sometimes to fall into the trap of judging other people when they are in discussions but then not contributing yourself. I know I did that at the beginning of the quarter and I tried to be better about remembering that I can only judge what other people are saying if I myself are saying something as well to contribute. Wow - your rubrics are always such a pleasure to read - you take the process seriously and invest yourself in it meaningfully.  I also plan to continue to look at multiple sources for information on the subject. While reading Henry IV I have many times resourced a copy of the play which has notes at the bottom to further explain the text, spark notes which provides a summary and a "translation" of what Shakespeare says into modern English and the resources that Chia has provided. They have helped me in understanding what I am reading better by giving me background information and nuances of the text that change the meaning sometimes drastically.

"Knows how to ask questions to fill in the gaps between what they know and what they don't know."

I believe this applies to me because of my work reading Henry IV and in Cuborica. An example is for Henry IV my group and I wrote questions when Chia asked what we still didn't know after reading Act 1 and what we thought would be helpful to know. What I think my group and I did well was after asking these questions we split them up and did research on them, and posted the research on our group page so that our whole group had access to the information. Another example, is when I have been reading all of the acts I have been putting the text into word and using the comment feature so that I can ask additional questions from the text. Some of the questions I have come up are... in Act 1 Scene 1 when Henry says "these pagans" is he referring to Percy and the Welshman?, What business does Henry IV have in the Holy Land?, and what is the significance to September 14th? Though most of these questions were answered in class discussions or after further reading of the play, by asking these questions of the text while reading I further pushed my thinking so that I made sure to understand the meaning of what all of the characters were saying. Exactly - you were aware that knowing that information would help you and you were cued in to the information when it was presented later in the play. Another example, is when I was reading Act 1 scene 2 I also used the comment feature when I did not know what Falstaff was referring to. I asked questions such as who is Diana whom Falstaff is referring to and what was her significance? Also I asked about his reference to the seven stars and Phoebus. After doing research into these questions I found out that Diana was the Goddess of the Moon and the Hunt and the seven stars were a representation of seven Greek goddesses. Phoebus was also supposed to be another name for the Greek sun god. By researching these questions I was able to make the references to the Greek polytheistic religion which was a pagan religion. This brought me to ask more questions about whether or not Falstaff and Hal believed in the pagan religions and the contrast that would make with the line spoken by Henry IV which referred to chasing pagans out of holy fields. Another example is in Cuborica. In Cuborica my group and I were constantly regrouping out of our small sub-committees to find out what information we knew and what we still needed to know. For example we  asked who controls the oil and are their oil companies, does Cuborica have taxes and how could that affect being able to divide up the oil, what was the motivation behind the 1993 world trade center bombing and the Timothy McVeigh bombing? These kinds of questions were frequently asked which pushed our group to provide more evidence for our claims for what we wanted from the government. In order to continue asking questions to find out what I know and what I need to find out I plan after every assignment I am giving to write a reflection in which I ask questions of what I have done, what I am supposed to get out of the assignment and what I still need to find out. Then I plan to go about making a page for these questions and systematically answering them in order to get more information that will help support my points in full class discussions.

"Changes mind when instructed – follows willingly"

I believe this applies to me because of my work on Henry IV and Cuborica. An example for Henry IV is when Whiting posed the idea that the court is a place where everything is at stake and you do not have to earn your position of authority, it is handed to you. While at the tavern nothing is at stake and you have to earn your position of authority. I never disagreed about this, I just never really thought about it until it was brought to my attention and then I followed it because Miss. Whiting had said it. I think that this was a good thing that she said it because it focused in on what a lot of people were thinking but didn't know how to form. We had danced around the point a lot saying that at the tavern people can be themselves and have fun and are entertained. All I did was push you to see why it was fun, what the costs or consequences are in each setting. At the court we had brought up that people are under strict command and are expected to act like a noble or royalty. However, we never really focused in on the contrast between them and what the consequences of one are versus the other. This point helped to focus in on Hal's motivation for spending time at the tavern and how he may have used his time there for learning or practice. Another example is when Chia posed the question that he disagreed that Falstaff didn't have power. At first I agreed with the class that Falstaff didn't have power because all the time I believed based on Hal's soliloquy that Falstaff was just wrapped around Hal's finger and was part of his great plan. Once Chia posed that question I automatically changed my mind and went to find research to support that he did have power. I looked up the different types of power since I knew he didn't have power through a position of authority and found a website that listed ten different types of power. I made the connection that Falstaff had the power of charisma and personality and that is what draws people to him. Another example of how I have changed my mind when instructed is during Cuborica. When our group formed a document of a coalition with the Cubnians we thought that we had really outsmarted them and had made great strides. However, when Miss Whiting came over to us and said that our contract was completely bogus because we couldn't form a coalition with terrorists we completely dropped the idea and severed all of our connections with the Cubnians. Instead of trying to see if there was another way to be successful with their help we decided to take a completely different path which ended up being a good decision in the end. Interesting - all or nothing - swinging between opposites rather than seeking middle ground. I believe that changing my mind when instructed is a good thing because I believe trying to change our minds or giving us a different perspective is Chia and Whiting's way of trying to steer us down a path that will end with the result that they hope we will get to which could be anything from a better understanding of a text or a clearer understanding of the way a political party works. However, I think that by changing my mind I need to make sure that I understand why Chia and Whiting's point makes more sense and make sure I have evidence to support why I changed my mind other than "Chia and Whiting said so." In order to do this I think I need to put some situations in the context of my own life. I say this because during a Henry IV discussion on March 29th Chia and Whiting put Sarah McNee on the spot and asked her to show how the quote she chose from Act 1 Scene 2 applied to her own life. She was unable to do so but with help from other classmates the whole class was able to understand why the line made sense in the context of what we are going through as teenagers. By doing this more often I think I will be able to see one, why Chia and Whiting chose what they chose for us to do, and two, the particular motivation of a character was to do something or to say something. Interesting.s

"Understands that there are different ways to answer the question"

I believe this applies to me because of my work on my slavery and emancipation essay, Henry IV, and Cuborica. An example is for my slavery and emancipation essay my thesis changed many times which shows that my thinking changed along the way. My thesis started as being "In the Antebellum Period, I believe the law became something subjective, one-sided and biased, in which those who were by law “free” were never actually free and those who were enforcing the law were also slaves to their society." After conferencing with Miss Whiting my thesis became more focused and more pointed at the characters I was using and the idea I was trying to get across, it was changed to saying "Skiffington and Lincoln infringe on the freedom of characters such as Moses and Rose Williams by keeping them in the cycle of slavery and making them believe in their own inferiority." For my final draft my thesis changed again to saying " For a slave to be emancipated they must have the mental ability to not let their feelings of being treated as less than human affect their life. " I believe that this shows that though the original question was "Once someone has been enslaved can they ever truly be emancipated" there can be many answers to this question on both the yes and no side. Another example of how I understand there are many ways to answer a question is with Henry IV.  When my group and I were performing Act 1 Scene 1 to the class we took into account that there could be multiple reasons that Henry was saying this speech to Westmoreland. We brainstormed that his motivation could be manipulation or true love for England. Since we were not sure which one was really his motivation or perhaps both we prefaced to the class that we were taking the assumption that Henry was being manipulative. (See notes) <-- in red. Another example, is with the Cuborica simulation. At the point in the simulation where we had to decide whether or not to form a coalition with the Cubnians I suggested that we answer the questions by brainstorming the three possible outcomes, we form a coalition and get what we want from the Japicas, we form a coalition and we don't get what we want from the Japicas, or we don't form a coalition and we don't get what we want. By doing so my group and I realized it was important to understand how the answer of forming a coalition had to be considered from all possible angles. (See notes) <-- in pink. In order to continue looking at all the possible answers to a question I plan to in my reflection after each assignment as well as writing down any further questions I might have that would help my understanding, I plan to also make a list of the different outcomes that we may see in a situation or different perspectives one could see through. For example answering answering Chia's question of what accounts for Hal's transformation I could look at it from Falstaff's perspective, King Henry's perspective and Hal's perspective as well. Good job.

"Usually but not always grasps details, nuances or subtleties as a result of emergent critical thinking skills"

I believe this applies to me because of the work I did for Henry IV and for Cuborica. In my last end of quarter rubric I said that I thought that the questions I had come up with for Bara were much better than the ones I had come up with for the Dew Breaker. I believe that that also stands true for my work on Henry IV. The questions that my group and I came up with were very specific and we could tell what information we wanted to get from each question. For example, some of our questions were "How was Hal looked at by other countries and was he known in places other than in England? What was going on in England at the time Shakespeare wrote this play that might have influenced his writing? Also, What was Henry's influence over other countries, based on prior engagements? This last question is especially important because it was originally a different question along the lines of if Henry had family in other countries or a situation similar to that in World War I when all of the rulers were related to each other. When I found no research about any of Henry's family members outside of England I changed the question so that the information I had found about Henry's relationship with other countries could be evidence for a question. I reformulated the question to saying what was Henry's relationship with other countries based on prior engagements. Another example is with Cuborica. Since each group had to have a basis for all of the claims they made or decisions they made we paid specific attention to providing a reason for our actions. An example is during the State of the Union speech. We wanted to say that the Boreacans would have an issue if we were not given a large percentage of the profit from the oil since it was in our territory but needed a reason to be able to support this. I had recently been doing research for Presidential Classroom and had listened to a podcast about the issues in Nigeria and the bands of Nigerian people who had committed terrorists attacks because the big oil companies such as Shell were sucking all of their oil and taking all the money, leaving no profit for the people of Nigeria. Cool - how fortuitous when those things come into sync! We were able to use this in our speech to support our claim that we should get a profit, to avoid attacks on the government. Another example in Cuborica was after the simulation was done and we were writing done themes that as a group we thought we evident in Cuborica. What I believe shows the critical thinking skills is that we did not just think about the main themes of power and foreign relations but we thought of the bad side of the situation and how Cuborica proved that situations in which people are striving to attain power or strength human nature plays a role and turns even those with the best intentions into secret keeping, back stabbers. Some of the themes that we brainstormed were oppression, class segregation, secrecy, betrayal. (See notes)<-- in green. However, I do not feel that in all situations I grasp the nuances that I could. For example will reading Henry IV I did not pick up on how Shakespeare was using both the court and the tavern as examples of places with a hierarchy. I also with Cuborica did not pick up on the fact that political groups do not sign formal contracts like our Cubnian Coalition Contract or sign contracts with terrorists. I plan in order to better pick up these nuances to ask more questions and think about things in a real world context more. I believe as I previously stated a way to better understand what an author is trying to convey or to decipher the message of a story is to think about things as if I were put in the characters position and what would influence me in those situations. I also plan to keep a reflection after every assignment which I think will help me to tie everything together and hopefully think things in broader terms and what the real message of a place, person or line is.

"Open to criticism; holds up products for others to judge and seeks feedback in an ever-increasing effort to refine technique"

I believe that this applies to me because of my work on my slavery and emancipation essay, with Cuborica and with homework. For my slavery and emancipation essay I was open to criticism and judgment in writing groups. In my first writing group in late January I read the working draft I had of my piece to my group but we were short on time and I did not get a chance to get a lot of feedback. However, I was told by my group that they thought I should look back to the paper we did on truth and belief and also consider how someone could be enslaved by their beliefs. In the second writing group I was given more of a chance to get feedback. I asked my group whether only having two characters was sufficient and whether I was getting my point across, which was that once people are told they are inferior they forever hold those feelings and so are forever enslaved. The comments I received back were that I should be clear on what change's Rose's mind set from being strong and in control of herself to letting herself be used and letting herself be so affected by her experience that she would never get married. Some other comments were that I should just keep the two characters and compare how Rose felt inferior while Moses at first wouldn't except his status as inferior. (See notes) I believe that to show that I am open to criticism I need to show that I used their feedback in my paper. When I went to revise I changed my thesis but I did just keep the two characters, I did compare and contrast the characters, and I did show the importance of Rose choosing to stay which my group had suggested. Another example of how I am open to feedback is with Cuborica. In Cuborica I drafted a contract that my group, the Boreacans and the Cubnians were going to sign to form a coalition. Though this coalition did not work out, the day that I had finished it, I printed it out and asked the group if they had any comments of things I could change. We had a group discussion and I went and made amendments. I believe that this was one of our bets discussions in our Cuborica group because everyone contributed and we had reasoning for why certain parts should be included and why others should not or should be worded differently. We did this knowing what we wanted as our outcome which is important because we can use the skills of forming our ideas of where we want to get to with our questions and our theses for our papers. Another example is with homework. Our small group decided after our class intervention that though we weren't having any issues communicating having a group calendar would help us to make sure everyone knew the homework and came to class prepared. I put the Hal and Falstaff assignment and the page and sent out an e-chalk to all of my group members saying that if anyone felt differently about doing the assignment over the weekend or had anything to add to send me a message and I would change it. Having a group leader last quarter who I felt could be a bit demanding at times, I wanted to make sure my group members didn't feel I was overstepping my boundaries or trying to tell them what to do. In order to continue being open to criticism I don't feel I need to do anything different than I am at the moment. I am very conscious of how people perceive my actions and if I continue to make sure everyone feels okay about what I am doing and I continue to communicate well with my group members I feel things will continue to run smoothly. You were an excellent group leader!        

"May want to improve strategy repertoire but lacks the confidence or experience necessary to do so"

I believe this applies to me because of my work on my slavery and emancipation essay and Henry IV. Especially with my essay I found it difficult to keep myself interested in the topic because the time span over which we wrote the paper was very long and after I while I found myself not being motivated to make my paper better. For example I turned in my first draft of my paper when it was due back in December and then shortly after I conferenced with Miss Whiting about the paper because I really wanted to stay ahead of the game. With the other two papers we have done this year I have also felt unmotivated after a certain length of time to work on them any more. Once I got my rubric back and talked to her I tried to make some changes but instead of reworking my paper I completely rewrote. This happened three times with this paper and each of theses I stated above were the different drafts of the paper I wrote. If I had attempted to stick with one idea and continue to make it better I feel I would have moved up on the rubric and learned how to start somewhere and improve. By having so many ideas and never sticking with one I never learned how to improve. I believe the way to fix this is to come up with an idea and set a limit of changing that idea only once and then sticking with it and improving my paper instead of completely rewriting my paper. Another example is with Henry IV. In class discussions I often have one idea that I've worked hard on finding evidence for but then I have a question for someone else and I don't know how to phrase it so that I'll get an answer that will spark a new discussion. For example I asked Julie a few days ago to clarify a point she made. Her point was that Hal spent time in the tavern and while there practiced wit and manipulation but did not need that at the time when he was in battle. I asked her why she felt that Hal would spend so much time in the tavern and then not used what he learned. She answered that she meant that he would not use it right at that moment but that he would use it later. Unfortunately her answer was not what I was trying to get at. If I had better phrased my question I would have hopefully sparked a discussion about why Hal thinks that he knows what he'll need to be King when he has spent no time in the court. I could have made a connection to my life and said how would I know what I need to do to prepare to be the president of a club at Staples and not have ever spent any time in the club itself or been a member. I think that to improve my strategy repertoire I need to connect things to my life and phrase my questions with that reference to better solicit an answer that I am looking for.

"Not revisions, more like edits, rarely conferences"

I believe this applies to me because of my work on my slavery and emancipation essay and as a student in Collab in general. For my essay I only conferenced once and then I did not look at the paper for a month and then wrote part of the paper and didn't know where I was going with it. To reiterate what I have already said, I wrote so many new drafts that were not building off one another that I could not track my improvement and therefore could not truly revise my original paper and idea. For example I conferenced with Miss Whiting back in December and I did not work on the paper for a while after that and my "revision" did not truly embody any of the changes that she suggested I make. For example, I cut the characters to only two when Miss Whiting had given my four to work with. I also did not make my thesis clear and I dispelled definitions to get them out of the way. To improve my revision and conference more I am going to ask Chia and Whiting for deadlines for revisions and set up a conference for the day or two after I get each revision back so I can check in with them on how I am doing and where I should go from there. As a Collab student in general I feel that I have not conferenced with Chia and Whiting about Collab in general as much as other students have. Some people I know have weekly conferences which I don't think I need but perhaps twice a month I will try to check in with either Chia or Whiting just to let them know that I am interested in my performance and to give myself a chance to here what they feel I could be doing better in or how to improve.  

 "Listens to others, to empathize with, and to understand their point of view" and "tries to understand what the others are saying, may disagree sharply, but wants to know exactly what is disagreeing with"  

  I believe these points apply to me because of my work in my group for writing groups, Henry IV and in communication time discussions. In both of the writing groups we did this quarter I believe by following the writing group protocol I listened to my group members and tried to understand their POV. For example, when Riki was reading her paper I told her how I liked her idea about talking specifically about woman and their freedom. I also told her I liked how she brought in about girls not having enough role models. Then I suggested to her that she add in specifically what makes woman in particular less able to be free because when I thought about myself I said I don't think I am enslaved so what made these women enslaved. Also I suggested that she use the evidence in the reading about the girls who were not able to name even ten influential woman in history. (See notes) Another example, is with Jeff's paper during our second writing group on this paper. Since Jeff does not often speak up very much I tried to ask questions to force him to clarify and elaborate more about his paper. I asked him to clarify what his thesis was about which was whether or not t is right for someone to have complete control over someone else. He further explained that he was referring to whether the slave owners truly thought that what they were doing to these people was the right thing to do. I told him that I understood his point and that I liked how he talked about Lincoln and the slave owners to show the different types of power in the civil war time period. I also told him that I liked where he was going with the point that African Americans could buy their freedom but that it was not respected so was it really freedom. Another example, is with Henry IV. In a classroom discussion about Henry I asked Sally Ann and Gertrude what they meant by Falstaff being a father figure to Hal. I asked them why and they explained how they meant that Falstaff had an element of control over Hal and Hal looked up to him for guidance and support. Though I disagreed with them, and Estelle suggested perhaps we say role model instead, but I did listen to their point and gave them the time to explain. Later on when Tom said what he thought a father figure was and explained how he saw it as someone who you can choose to be or not to be but also has an element of control over your life I understood better where Danielle and Sarah were coming from I just needed to listen and give people time to explain. Another example is in the classroom discussion we had recently about whether the Wilton play about Iraq should be allowed to be performed. Will made a comment that he thought it should not because of all of the issues that could arise due to sensitivity and the problems that the principal would face. I listened to his point and then when I commented back I said though I understand where you are coming from I do not agree because I feel that controversy, though it can lead to problems often creates the best discussions and students should be allowed and encouraged to talk about controversial issues because we are the leaders of tomorrow. I believe to continue listening to others I do not need to change my behavior or work ethic. I feel that more of the time I listen rather than speak. This is evident because I take my own notes in class discussions and comment on what other people say in my notes questioning not only them but myself. I think in some cases this is just as valuable if not more than saying things in discussions especially if it is just for the sake of saying something. You did an excellent job drawing out people who don't share much, navigating interpersonal conflict, organizing and directing everyone's work. Great job!

"Fills multiple roles (leads and follows); Monitors and adjusts for group relations; Encourages all group members to share their ideas; Cares about goals; helps direct the group in setting and meeting goals" 

I believe this applies to me because of my work in Cuborica and with Henry IV discussions. An example is in Cuborica our big group relations were really tough. With people constantly at each others throats it made it very difficult to work. When Estelle and Avery were fighting I made a point to talk to both of them and also other group members to get their opinion on the situation. I spoke many times to Estelle explaining to her that it would be best to tone things down a little for the sake of the group. When I spoke to Avery I spoke explaining my experience. I told her how I have been friends with Estelle for a long time and that everything she says can not be taken to heart otherwise one will drive themselves crazy. In the end my efforts did not help but I think the rest of the group was able to remain successful, especially when we broke up into small sub-committees. Another example with Cuborica, was moving into the classroom. After monitoring group relations I realized that it was best for our group to stay in the classroom because by have Chia or Whiting's presence there people tended to act more civil and Chia and Whiting could interject when there was an issue. Overall, when Chia or Whiting were helping us we got so much more done than otherwise. An example of this was on January 31st when our group, the Boreacans encouraged the Cubnians to bomb the embassy in Aforia. By spending time in the classroom and being guided by Whiting, decisions were made and the group remained intact. Another example, is that knowing the main goal of forming the webpage I took control and got the job done. I worked a lot at home on it, that way in class we could remain on topic and off pointless discussions about setting up the page. In this way I believe I was a leader because I knew what had to get done and got it done. Another example, is in the Henry IV small group discussions we have been having lately. In the class intervention, not one group except mine had anything positive to say about their group leaders. Both Jeff and Sam especially were incredibly supportive of me and said that I was doing a great job. Sam said that when I got the assignment from Chia and Whiting I got the group together, quickly and made sure we got it done. Jeff explained how he often zones out and that I have helped him a lot this quarter to stay on focus and include him in group discussions. I felt very happy that my group thought I was doing a good job, especially Jeff since I had been in a group with him last quarter and knew that his main weakness is his shyness and fear of speaking up. I have made an effort this quarter to ask him how he feels if he is not speaking up and also to change his seating arrangement so that he would become more a part of the group discussion which can easily get centered around Sam and I. Both quarters I have seen group relations as my strong point so I do not believe that I want to change anything that I am doing, if anything just continue to include people more and make sure everyone feels that they are having a good experience and that it is worth while. Good job.

"Contributes to a thoughtful, productive classroom, group project or conference, by coming prepared and remaining attentive and involved"   Absolutely!

I believe that this applies to me because of my work on Cuborica and Henry IV. An example is in Cuborica, though we did not have formal homework, almost every day I went home and did research on countries that were in similar situations as ours such as Norway, Nigeria, Korea, Zambia, etc. I would bring this information daily to my sub-committee so that we could work from it and try to come to some conclusion on our goals and our demands from the government. Another example is how with Cuborica, as I already explained, when I was made aware by Connor that our group should start working on the website I came to class with work done on it everyday and asked people if there was anything that they wanted added. Most of my work was done on one of the snow days we had in January but by having it done the group was more productive than we would have been if we had needed to work on it during class. Another example, is with Henry IV. Everyday, since we have been having the Henry discussions I have made a conscious effort to read the spark notes summary and post it on my notes page for my group, so that I can explain to any one confused what was going on in the reading. I believe it is important for any group member but especially group leader to have the work that is supposed to be done done, so I have come in with the reading completed, notes taken and questions answered. In the classroom discussions as well I have made a big effort, since I normally tend not to speak up, to say something everyday so that I do not fall into a trap of getting away with not contributing. I know that by speaking up it helps my understanding of the text so in almost every discussion this past week I have made at least one comment that I believe had evidence and a basis behind it. For example, on March 27th I changed the topic of conversation in the class discussion because I believed that it was going in circles and brought up my belief that Falstaff does have power and it is through his charismatic personality. My evidence was that people covered for him in the robbery scandal, Hal paid his tavern bill and also kept him from getting arrested. I explained how Falstaff has nothing to bring to the table since he has lost all his money and dignity of being a knight, so his personality is that only thing that could possibly draw people in. I believe that to further contribute to a better classroom environment I need to learn to speak up more and ask more questions. If I don't have something to add I can always ask other people for more evidence (HDYK!) or further elaborate on their points.

"Strives to clarify and understand directions"

 I believe this applies to me because of my work on Henry IV. I have found that since I can not get instant gratification in Collab one way to make sure that I am on the right track and are getting what I am supposed to out of the assignment I can clarify what the directions are. For example, in class when we were working on picking particular lines to use for our role playing of Act 1 Scene 1. Since I wanted to make sure that we were on the right track I asked Chia if we could choose whether Henry IV was being manipulative or was making his speech to really show his love for England. Since we didn't know anything about his personality I wanted to make sure that it was okay to make an inference as long as we picked evidence to support it. Chia clarified that we could make that decision and the lines we picked should exhibit that. By clarifying I was able to better understand what the assignment was which was to pick what parts of Shakespeare exhibit a certain personality of view of a particular character or scene. Another example is when we were reading about Falstaff and how he was formally known as Oldcastle. When I was doing the reading I wasn't sure what I was really looking for so I asked Chia to clarify what new understanding we were supposed to get from the reading and he explained that we were just supposed to understand Falstaff's background an dhow his character came about. By talking to Chia and clarifying this assignment I ended up forming the question "Why is Falstaff included in Henry IV since he was not a real person in history and what is he supposed to convey to the reader about Hal's character?" Another example, is when we were doing the assignment where we were answering the question what evidence of there is Hal's transformation in Act 4 Scene 2. Since Hal only had two lines in the whole scene I emailed Chia to ask him how the assignment was supposed to be done when nothing Hal said in the whole act had anything to do with his transformation. Chia emailed me back and said that it was a good question and that I should infer how Hal would react based on what other characters said. This made me understand the assignment better because then I went back and looked at what Falstaff and Westmorland said to see how Hal had transformed. Another example, when I went to Whiting and asked her for clarification and finishing the assigned Henry IV assignments. I explained to her that my group had done a lot of work on Hal and Falstaff but that in class we had moved on from that assignment so should it be finished or not? She explained that these assignments were finished when I got a new understanding from them that added to my overall understanding of the play. By clarifying this I now better understand what assignments have to be worked on a lot a which can be looked at but don't have to be gone to in depth on based on their overall importance to the play. In order to continue clarifying directions I plan to  just keep asking questions and making sure I have understand before I start the assignment what I am supposed to get out of it.

"Reflects on and evaluates the productiveness of own thinking; increasingly aware of own actions and the effect of those actions on others and on the environment" REFLECTING IS MUCH MORE ABOUT HOW YOU THINGS AND WHY YOU DO THEM THAT WAY THAN IT IS ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE DOING - you do this very well!

I think that this applies to me because of what I have done on my what did we do today page and the communication I have with my group. Daily I reflect on my work by writing down in my what did we do today page what I did and whether or not it worked. (See Notes) Last quarter I had a what did we do today page but I wrote down what I did and not whether or not what I did worked and this quarter I did and it made the biggest difference. For example, on January 22nd which was the first day with my third quarter group I wrote the "Did it Work" section about what I noticed about my group members so far. I wrote "I observed that Riki and Sam are more outspoken while Maggie and Jeff are more likely to be really good listeners. We agreed as a group in order to push our thinking as a group we will work to get everyone to talk equally so that no one feels trapped in the net of being silent and not knowing what to say."  By evaluating what I was thinking about my group and writing down what I thought the personality traits of my group members were it helping me to plan out how I would be an efficient group leader for my group. I decided that I would try to get Jeff and Maggie to talk a lot in small group discussions and in class discussions as well. By writing this down it has helped me guide my role with my group members all quarter long. Another example, is on January 30th which was one of the first few days of Cuborica. In my page I wrote "I am trying as a group member to keep us looking forward and not hung up on one particular issue. I think this homework assignment will force us to understand that there are many possible outcomes to a situation and that not everyone in the group will always be able to have their favored outcome occur." By assessing my behavior and knowing that I hadn't helped my group but instead kept us on one issue I realized that I was not helping my group out. By assessing this and saying what I needed to do better throughout the rest of Cuborica I helped my group go from issue to issue more smoothly. Examples of this are when we split up into small groups, when we got our contract finished and when we made the decision to secede. All of these times we kept moving forward and looking into the future. Another example is on March 14th when we had our Collab intervention and my group commented on what they felt they needed to work on. I wrote in my page "As group leader I was commended on keeping the group together, making sure everyone feels like they are contributing and are on equal standing with one another. What I think I could do to help me group based on the group discussion today is to encourage my group members to say their points, give them confidence and all around do more research so that we as a group can substantiate on one another's points better." When I wrote this reflection I felt good about what my group members had said but I realized that my behavior as group leader was effecting my group and since I wasn't speaking up very much in class perhaps that was a reason my group members weren't either. Since I have been making a conscious effort to speak up more and I have encouraged them to do so as well most of my group members have spoken up at least once in every discussion. By evaluating my behavior I was able to make the necessary changes to help myself and my group members as well. Another example is on "For me today was not particularly successful. I felt that after watching the movie clip I had a better understanding of Hal and Falstaff's relationship. I also realized the hierarchy of the tavern which I had not picked up on before. However, in the class discussion I didn't talk because I didn't feel I had anything that could substantiate any of the points brought up. I was considering commenting on how in the reading we did last night (act IV scene II) you can see the distinct differences between the lower class and nobility with responsibility (how the upper class pays their way out of responsibility but since the lower class can't do that they assume responsibility." However, the opportunity never arose. In the next discussion I want to come up with an original point that I can substantiate that will change the discussion from being constantly on Hal and Falstaff's relationship." By making this evaluation I realized that I wasn't being particularly productive and that the way to do better is to come up with more original points. If I had not reflected on my actions in class I would not have thought about how I can improve. In order to continue reflecting on my work and how it effects my group members I plan to continue doing my what did we do today page and continuing communicating with my group. Since this quarter I sent a lot of e-chalks and kept in close contact I plan to do that again next quarter so that my group knows that I am interested in them, respect them and wish to remain involved.

"May use past reflection for goal setting"           

I believe this applies to me because of my work on Henry IV and the assignment we did the first day setting goals for third quarter. For Henry IV an example is how for each of the acts I have read I have used the comment feature to take notes on the reading. Last quarter I said that I needed to use sticky notes or just straight type my notes from the reading to stay organized and find evidence more quickly. By having the text in my page and having notes it had been easier for me this quarter to find evidence in class discussions and to have a better understanding of the themes in the book. For example, I was able to get a better understanding of the importance of the conflict of religions in the play by using the comment feature and taking notes on the different religious references. Another example, is how last quarter I mentioned that in my goal setting for this quarter that I wanted to work on making stronger literary and historical references. I used that goal from my rubric from last quarter to help me this quarter. Examples of how I have met this goal is the number of times my group has commented on the references I have come up with. I have tied characters such as Falstaff to Benjamin Franklin because of his wit and good humor. By looking at these characters similarly have gotten a better understanding of what I think about their influence over others. Another example is how I tied the leadership discussion we were having to Watergate and Nixon and explained how I believe that a good leader is not necessarily someone who doesn't lie or make mistakes because there are many aspects to people's ability to be a leader. Another example, is the goal I set for this quarter which was to continue to fill multiple roles even as a group leader. Last quarter I was able to do that well and I wanted to continue that behavior this quarter. An example of how I have done this this quarter is how sometimes I stay out of the discussion and let someone else talk about the topic more. I also tend to let other people such as Maggie and Jeff take the floor when they wish to do so. In order to continue reflecting and making goals for next quarter I plan to start off my with my next group setting goals based on all of our experiences last quarter. I want to hear what other people want to work on most as well and then make sure that we act on those goals or at least take them into account.

"In oral presentation: articulate, prepared, rehearsed, well-supported and informed "

I believe this applies to me because of my work on Henry IV, and Cuborica. For example, in the discussions we have been having this past week about Henry IV I have made sure to speak at least once in every discussion but I have tried to say things only when I have sufficient evidence to support it. For example, on March 27th we had a discussion about Hal and Falstaff's relationship and whether Falstaff has lost power because he was tricked by Hal and Falstaff. I said that I believed that he has not lost power because though he is not in a power position like Hal or Henry he still commands the attention of people. The night before I had gone and done research about the different types of power and wrote how each type did or did not apply to Hal, Henry and Falstaff. Through this research I was able to make a more substantial point to the class that Falstaff has his power through his charismatic personality. I noted in my work that "He manipulates people into paying for him, spending time with him and protecting him which he could only do through his personality now that he has nothing to bring to the table." Another example of how I have come to the discussions prepared and supported is when on March 26th I asked Sally Ann why she saw Falstaff as a father figure. According to the discussion notes I said "Q: Evidence that Falstaff is a father figure? We found the opposite - a father figure wouldn't encourage a son to rob people. During the role play Falstaff talks about how good he is while talking down about the other people in the tavern. More of a relationship where they are using each other which is what brings them together." My evidence for this was the role playing scene in which Falstaff shows his desire and need of Hal for a position in the government. He says to Hal ... banish Bardolph and Peto but not good John Falstaff. Hal shows that he also needs Falstaff in his soliloquy in Act 1 Scene 2. Without Falstaff he would not have the same level of "lowness" that he does now by hanging at the tavern. Without Falstaff he would find it more difficult to look really immature and childish and then suddenly be responsible and princely like. He even says in the speech that they are all part of his plan which shows Falstaff's importance. By using the evidence from both of these passages I was able to effectively show their mutual need for one another and then said that I believe according to human nature that those who need each other for mutual benefit can get along despite differences. I used an example in my small group discussion of Jack Sparrow and Will Turner in Pirates of the Caribbean. They at first despised one another but when Jack needed Will to escape from jail and Will needed Jack to save Elizabeth they came together by using one another. Another example was in Cuborica. For Cuborica when we needed examples of countries that have had good experiences or bad with oil companies and the oil economy I went home and did research about it and brought it back to my group. The next day in class I was able to talk fluently about the issues that Nigeria has with their oil situation and the terrorist group MEND that is currently holding hostages and also Norway which was a great system in which the oil is distributed through tax cuts and regulations are kept stricter on import and export. As a result Norway has one of the best running oil systems in the world. my group and I were then able to take that information and build off of it and know what to take from the reading to help us. Another example for Henry IV was on March 6th when as a group we were deciding what lines to use for our role playing of Act 1 Scene 1. I said to my group that I thought that we should choose lines that air towards Henry IV being manipulative because we already knew that Henry IV could be sneaky and conniving because he overthrew Richard II very abruptly and very stealthily. However, when I was explaining to my group why I felt that way I also provided evidence that there were three possibilities that we could choose from which were manipulation, greed and love for England. (see notes) <-- in blue. I had examples for each such as the one I had for the possibility of Henry's love for England ... "No more the thirsty entrance of this soil Shall daub her lips with her own children's blood; Nor more shall trenching war channel her fields, Nor bruise her flowerets with the armed hoofs" This quote could be interpreted as Henry showing his despair in seeing his people in such a horrible state. I said in my notes that I believe that " This line shows love for England because even though Henry is using this as personification and imagery to exacerbate the situation it still strikes me as coming from someone with some compassion towards the cause and wanting to put an end to the bloodshed." In order to continue finding evidence for my points and being able to articulate them I going to rehearse more at home before class. I think that will help me to work out the words before I say them. I know one of my biggest faults with my writing is that I rarely read it aloud and therefore I can not tell how it sounds. If I say my points out loud before class then I will know if they sound well supported and make sense. I am also going to try to predict in my after assignment reflection what Chia and Whiting might bring up in the next discussion or ask in order to be more on top of the situation and be better prepared. Excellent - you are well-prepared for class, you ask good questions of new content and seek meaningful answers. So, when you share something with the group or the class, you know what you are talking about.

"Writes with some clarity but with some notable editing errors or occasional awkwardness "

I believe this applies to me because of my work on my slavery and emancipation essay. For example, on my first draft when I was attempting to explain the different types of people who were enslaved my reference was worded awkwardly and it was not clear who I was referring to. I said "The free blacks of the Confederacy were also slaves to the law because, though it was put in place to protect their freedom, those who were the enforcers didn’t necessarily abide by the laws that guaranteed their freedom." Miss Whiting commented back to me that she didn't know who the enforcers were and what they were enforcing or who the laws guaranteed freedom to. If I had changed the wording the sentence structure would have better conveyed the meaning of what I was trying to say. Another example is later on the draft I said "According to the document the Free Blacks in the Antebellum Period a very small number of free blacks owned slaves and these black slave-owners mainly resided on plantations in Louisiana, Virginia and South Carolina. These free blacks were just as much as a slave the establishment of slavery than the slaves themselves." Miss Whiting commented back that the way I introduced this source was an awkward reference. If I had stated the point and perhaps afterward cited the source it would have made the sentence seem more connected to the paragraph and not so choppy. Another example is when at the end of the draft I tried to tie in the Declaration of Independence and explaining why like Lincoln the writers had to take out the abolishment of slavery from the Declaration in order to get the southern states to sign it. Miss Whiting's comment was that in that paragraph including that part made the whole paragraph too cluttered. If I had tried to break up the different points better and perhaps included that point as part of my introduction or made it my main theme than the paper may have flowed from idea to idea better. Another example is on the second draft of the paper that I did. I said "It is much easier to say what is not having freedom than what freedom actually is. Just like the terms truth and belief; freedom can be looked at in so many different ways." Miss Whiting's comment back was that the sentence was awkward and by including truth and belief was i just going through the thinking process or was that part really necessary. Since this sentence was my topic sentence if I had instead gone with a more direct approach that is not so much questioning and opening doors but coming more to a thesis and direct statement my whole paper following may have been more pointed and direct. Another example is when I was trying to show the connection that Lynch's method of turning slaves against one another was demonstrated in Moses' actions. I said that "When Elias gets into trouble it is apparent that Moses still harbors those feelings as well. When Elias runs away Moses brings Elias to Henry and lets Henry and Oden cut off Elias’s ear. This seen shows that Moses turned his back on his own kind, if you will, and became dependent on Henry’s advice and acknowledgement, a devoted servant to his master." Miss Whiting's comment back to me was that she did not understand what I was trying to say. If I had better worded that I believed that Moses' action was a direct connection and implementation of what Lynch had said about keeping slaves enslaved forever than I may have made a stronger point. In order to make my writing more clarified and get rid of the occasional awkwardness I plan to conference more with Chia and Whiting and in those conferences explain what I am trying to say so that hopefully they can assist me in wording what I am trying to say better. I am also as I stated in the previous paragraph going to try to read what I write aloud so that it makes more sense and so I can avoid awkward spots better.