Day 8 Life of Pi

Here is the Day 8's Homework: Respond to the following question and make a blog post.
You guys have 2 nights to do this, so it's due Fri. 4/17 by Midnight.

Pi's adventure can be described as a hyperbolic coming-of-age tale. Can you describe an event in your life which served as a "turning point" for you. Find similarities/differences between your experience and Pi's.

Life of Pi day 5

In this section of the book, Pi finds himself stranded on a lifeboat in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, separated from his family but surrounded by wild animals. Obviously, few people ever experience anything like this. Is it possible for us to relate to any aspects of Pi's experiences, or can we never understand what he has gone through? If we can relate to him, how? If not, why not?

I'm not that great at titles either...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420084779742873.html

There is a process in debate where both schools in a debate get to “strike” one judge from a panel in order to ensure that the judging panel is as unbiased as possible. Mr. Oppenheimer points out an argument two coaches had over one such strike in order to try to attack modern debate.

He says that scholastic debate today does not incorporate witty flourishes or glamorous speeches. However, that is not what the essence of debate is about. If you need to use catchy phrases and practically sing your arguments to win them, you have no place debating. Modern policy debate is about research, preparedness, knowledge, and an ability to think on your feet. It is not an issue that “debaters no longer aspire to combine erudition and inspiration.” In my opinion (and many people agree with me), it is much more important to have a substantive debate where actual issues are discussed than it is to mindlessly rattle off ultimatums.

Mr. Oppenheimer points out that some college debaters now practice postmodern debate. However, he fails to notice that those people are in a minority. After 57 debates across the country, I have yet to debate such a team. And it’s not just me. I know of only 2 instances throughout the entire year where a “critical affirmative” was run. And, even if a consensus were reached that postmodern debate is bad, eliminating it from debate would be impossible, because it is the very lack of rules that makes debate so interesting.  

Mr. Oppenheimer brought up the issue of talking fast and shorthand (which is typically referred to as “flowing,” a method used to take notes at a rapid pace). However, there is absolutely nothing lost by quickening the pace that you speak at. He uses the fallacy that either you make smart arguments or you talk fast. This is decidedly not true. If one could get away with making bad arguments because they were talking quickly, I would quit debate. He fails to notice the incomprehensibly large amount of research done before every tournament. Debaters are sure of their arguments before the round, and that keeps the arguments intelligent and tricky.

His argument about the more enthusiastic converts makes no sense. If he says that smaller high schools and colleges bring about modern debate, then he is making himself a victim to the very argument he set out to take down. This would mean that modern debate is a step in the right direction because older debate was exclusionary, and was senseless and dead-end competition between snobby products prep-schools. If he is saying that those “scrappy workhorses” should be eliminated, he is once again setting out to create a more exclusionary environment.

He goes on to show ignorance of how modern debate truly works. His claim that debate is “unmoored from oratory” is unfounded. There is a system at debate tournaments at every level where judges award speaker points based on how persuasive the debater was. At the end, all the speaker points are tallied for each debater and the ones with the highest totals get rewarded. He also says that debate does not prepare Americas youth for the real world. However, does the process of flowing not help during a particularly long meeting, or during a lengthy lecture? Does the ability to construct an argument effectively and based off of research not help write reports and papers?

Also, if Mr. Oppenheimer wishes to change presidential debate, perhaps he should run for president, or write the candidates. I doubt that Obama spends much time reading peoples complaints about the stylized fashion policy debate takes on. At the end, he once again brings up the point that you can talk slowly and convey ideas. This is entirely true. However, there is no reason you can’t talk quickly and convey just as smart, if not smarter, ideas.

As we debaters actually say, in a world where 70% of congress has debated in high school, we should try very hard to focus them on learning about substantive issues, rather than mindless cliché phrases that will woo crowds.

Life of Pi Day 2

Here is our "class illustration" (click on it to see it bigger):
And the question to go along with it:
What, besides religion, did you feel that Yann Martel was emphasizing in the section and how is this expressed in our class illustration?

If you notice the answers getting repetitious and have nothing new to add, you may try one of these questions instead:

1) Either: what new insight does our picture reveal to you?

2) Or: what specific portion of our picture do you find problematic?

Notes from the questions:

In your personal life, what do you get out of your religion and does it relate to the car metaphor? If so, how?

• God is your GPS
• Who is Martel talking about?
• destructive--larger=worse?
• reason:car; religion:gps
• answers questions
• fuel=will power/motivation

In your opinion and ignoring Pi’s religious affiliation, what religion suits Pi the best?

• Buddhism- ignores labels, about self, Pi=Buddha, live in the now
• Bahai- accepts all religions with own philosophy
• no religion- do whatever he wants
  

Using the text, what connection do you find between religion and human nature?

• 2 steps towards God, he runs towards you (p. 61)
• people need religion to create boundaries
• Pi's house with all 3 religions--want to believe in something
• human nature to want answers
• book comes out on 9/11-->people turn to religion in times of need
  

Martel asserts that animals only attack when threatened. We find that his description of animals can be closely related to people. Do you think that in the same way there are no truly evil people, just people who are threatened?

• tragedy and anger-take it out on those who don't understand
• vicious circle
• are we too nice to evil people?
• no "Voldemort" evil--nobody capable
• always a motive
• everyone has some good--people who act without threat
• greed in humans, not in animals
• man most dangerous animal in zoo
  

Knowing Content vs. Thinking Critically

The debate between "learning facts" and "learning to think" is nothing new. For decades, educators have voiced the importance of "thinking" and ranked the skill much higher than the accumulation of facts (i.e., memorization). "Thinking is a habit of the mind that can apply to any information," they say. Their intent is to teach students how to learn instead of what to learn.

Honing one's thinking skills is certainly a skill I value. In fact, I often like to see it in action. Formulating questions, considering multiple viewpoints, making connections, and examining a writer's craft are just some of the thinking skills stressed when actively reading a text. Of course I am a fan of critical thinking. My concern; however, has to do with completely downplaying the importance of pure facts or basic knowledge.

In the article, Goolge generation has no need for rote learning, Wikinomicks author Don Tapscott, states, "The existence of Google, Wikipedia and online libraries means that there is no useful place in school for old-fashioned rote learning." Seems extreme, don't you think? I, for one, never want to hear my doctor say, "I'm not really sure what exactly makes up the respiratory system, nor do I know exactly how it works. But, as soon as I run a few more tests, gather the data, and get online, I'll figure this out. I may not have a lot of knowledge, but I sure know how to synthesize data." That's the day I change doctors.

Yes, thinking skills are crucial to academic, professional, and personal success. But, without the core knowledge, what are you going to think about? Your turn. What do you think about the debate between "learning stuff" and "learning how to learn stuff"?

EG

Okay, so I've been waiting to post forever. Today, I noticed a copy of Ender's Game sitting on the counter next to the computer, and I freaked out. I LOVE that book. I read it probably around 5th grade, and have been obsessed ever since. It's not great writing, but the ending is totally unexpected, and it takes a lot to throw me off guard like Ender's Game did. If any of you have read it, you might know what I mean. I won't tell you what happens--other than the fact that it's science fiction and involves aliens and a child prodigy--but I totally recommend it for a quick, fun read. 

It also has some pretty deep lessons about fame, hard work, discrimination, etc. So I was wondering: If you've read EG, how do you feel about it and the questions it raises? If not, what other books have "touched" you the way EG has always stuck with me? 

Reflecting THUS FAR

So, we are more than half-way done with Freshman Year! WOW! 1(almost) down 3 to go! How do you guys feel about? What were your goals this year? Did you accomplish them? How was it different than what you thought it might have been? How did Academy change your overall experience? What activities/clubs/sports have you done this year?

What are your plans for the next year?

How do you feel THUS far into the year? :)