In the article that was originally published in Salon.com, Mary Elizabeth Williams argues that expensive items have more value and they maintain more. She believes that some particular things should be valued more. I agree with her point of view, some specific expensive things worth their money. On the other hand there is a variety of stuff that cost less, in the same good quality and condition with those that cost more.

The author claims that it makes more sense to buy a pair of sunglasses that costs more but its going to last longer. She gives an example by saying that her family after four years had to buy new cabinets because the brand-new cabinets from IKEA broke. Furthermore in the very first paragraph the author emphasizes how shocked she was when she learned that camisoles from Old Navy cost only $2. She believes that its ridiculous for a company like Old Navy to sell camisoles for $2.

I am a student in New York City and from my experience I believe that in stores like IKEA, Target and Forever 21 you can find cheap suitable things. Williams mentions that food like sushi must cost more. But things are not that easy because there are a lot of families that don't have the comfort to have dinner every night at expensive restaurants. That is why in New York you can find every little thing you are looking for in different stores and prices.

On the contrary as the author asserts there are items like an iPhone or a $7000 Viking range that cost a lot more but you are 100% sure about the quality. The best thing a man can have is choice. You can either buy a cellphone that costs $250 or one that costs $600. Its your choice and your money. 

In-Class Work: Thursday, November 21st

In your group, discuss each of these questions about the CAT-W and come to a group decision as to your answer. Try to get everyone on board, but vote if you need to.

TRUE OR FALSE:

1) You have to know a lot about the subject of the passage to do well on the CAT-W.


2) After summarizing the passage in your first paragraph, don't mention it again: stick to your own ideas.


3) Your examples should speak for themselves: don't spend too much time explaining how they relate to the idea.


4) Try to put as many different ideas in one paragraph as you can.



********************

List the five categories you'll get a score in.

Work for Monday, November 11th

FOR EVERYONE: Buy a newspaper or look at one online. Pick and read an article that you think the CAT-W might use. (It might be longer than what would be on the CAT-W). Read it and take notes: what is the main argument? What do you think? Bring the article to class.

OPTIONAL: Do a practice test based on any of the prompts on the CAT-W LaGuardia wiki. (Here's the link.) You can email it, post it on the blog, or bring it to class.

Revise any of your practice tests or other responses/essays.

You can do these optional assignments anytime between now and your test date.

Resources for CAT-W

As we've discussed, the CAT-W test builds on the skills we've been working on all semester: summarizing what we read and responding, looking at the author's argument and his/her evidence, organizing your thoughts, and using clear writing that makes sense.

Remember that you can come see me before or after class or during my office hours, W 1-2, Th 12-1, or another time by appointment, to discuss our work.

You can also go to the Writing Center, E111. Tell them you want to work on CAT-W practice or a specific grammar issue and they will me more than willing to help you. Or, you can bring something you've written for our class.

Here are some on-line resources: John Jay college has a very good website to review the main things to remember on the test.

LaGuardia's CAT-W wiki has some sample passages ('prompts') and handouts and worksheets for grammar practice.

The general writing section of Purdue's OWL site is a good resource if you know what specific issues you want to work on. Keep in mind we aren't doing research on the CAT-W, so those materials won't be relevant.

        In the essay, "Blue-Collar Brilliance" by Mike Rose, the writer informs the reader that jobs that do not require a school diploma, does not mean that the workers are not intelligent. In fact, the author states that these jobs require special skills in order to get the job done. For example, just like his mother, a waitress must be able to carry multiple objects in their hands, analyze the customers behavior as well as being able to satisfy their needs. Also, you must be able to solve problems so that you can continue to work efficiently and effectively. This requires a lot of mental and physical work.

       With regards to Mike Rose's argument, Mike Rose has a brother named Joe Meraglio who did not finish High School but yet he is intelligent and does his job very well. Joe Meraglio started off working at General Motors in the assembly line and gradually increased his position to supervising the paint and body department. When he was in the assembly line he had to learn how to learn "how to efficiently use his use body by acquiring a set of routines that were quick and as well as being able to  preserve energy". Joe needed to solve problems that prohibit him to complete a task as well as being able to learn the functions of the machines around him. He became very skilled and knowledgeable which caused his promotions. However, this would not been completed without physical and mental work.

          I agree with Mike Rose because based on my personal experiences, I had to complete difficult task that was taught to me in school. While in training to become an Auxiliary Police Officer I needed to become skilled in many things in order to pass. In school I was taught to memorize words and follow directions. This helped me a lot because I was able to memorize radio codes and be able to follow directions that were given to me. But in school I was not taught to read people's body language which is extremely important when your an Auxiliary Police Officer. At first in my training, I will confront innocent people because I was not able to read their body language very well. Many of these innocent people would get frustrated and shout that they did not do anything wrong which was true. Over time I had to learn by myself how to read body language very well. Through the process in training I've stopped potential crimes that would harm the community. Now I am skilled and able to read body language effectively and stop crimes in the real world without the help of school.

In the article "You're 16, You're Beautiful, You're a Voter" by Anya Kamenetz, the author believes that teenagers at the age of sixteen should be able to have more "adult rights and responsibilities". Anya Kamenetz is convinced that if we give sixteen year olds more responsibilities, they will meet the standards that young adults should be in. The author gives examples such as driver's permits, drinking age, voting and financial responsibilities as steps that can be given to sixteen year olds in order to make them into a strong individual. 
One of the responsibilities that the author uses to support her claim is giving sixteen year olds driving permits. In order to receive a drivers permit, you need to take an exam to test your knowledge about the rules that must be followed in order to drive. Once you have taken this exam and passed the requirements then you are able to drive in the streets with an adult. To drive you must take responsibility in returning home before curfew and being able to follow the rules at all times. The author states that when teenagers are given a driver's permit there is a " 38 percent reduction in fatal crashes among the young drives" (AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety). This proves that by granting a teenager the ability to drive they will proceed situations with caution and be aware of the responsibilities it takes to be safe. As a result, adults are able to view sixteens year olds as adults because of the duties they have to face and overcome.

Writing for Monday, October 21st

Choose ANY essay we've read together this semester. ("Coney Island,"  "Shooting an Elephant," "A Talk to Teachers," "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box," "Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter," "Is Google Making Us Stupid," "Don't Blame the Eater," or "Blue Collar Brilliance.") Choose something you liked, or something you hated, or something that made you think, or made you angry, or created any other strong reaction.

Write a short essay of at least 300 words responding to the essay you've picked. Follow these guidelines.

1) In your first paragraph, introduce and SUMMARIZE the essay.  Use paraphrase, not direct quotation. Then write one sentence talking about your response: what you liked, hated, what made you think, etc.

2) In at least three body paragraphs, develop your reaction in more detail. Talk about why you liked/didn't like it, what you thought was interesting/important, etc. Use specific examples from the essay. Again, paraphrase, don't quote directly. The essay you're writing about should be in each paragraph.

3) In your last paragraph, talk about the "so what." Why does it matter if we believe the author's argument? What big moral, ethical, philosophical questions does the essay raise?

In many cases, you'll be able to use the shorter assignments/blog posts as a starting point. Look at my comments and make revisions as you expand your work.

You can post your essay on the blog, type it and print it out, or write it by hand. Take about ten minutes to read over your work. Try reading your sentences out loud and see if they make sense.

Assignment for Thursday, October 17th

For Thursday, October 17th, read Mike Rose, "Blue-Collar Brilliance" (page 243-255 in They Say, I Say), and Tom Bissell, "Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter" (page 349-361).

For ONE of the two essays, write three paragraphs.

- One that describes the author's main argument. Use at least one of the verbs on p. 39-40.

- One that describes some of the author's most important EVIDENCE or SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS. Use at least one of the transitions on p. 109-110.

- One that describes YOUR OWN OPINION about the argument (yes/no/yes, but).

We don't have class Monday, October 14th or Tuesday, the 15th. Use this time to get caught up on any assignments you have missed: see the posts below. You can do them on the blog or turn them in handwritten or typed.

Assignment for Thursday October 10th

NOTE: You can complete this assignment on the blog, by hand, or type it to turn in.

Write TWO paragraphs responding to Anya Kamentetz's article, "You're 16, You're Beautiful, You're a Voter."

In your first paragraph, SUMMERIZE her MAIN ARGUMENT. Include an introduction of the author and text. Look at the verbs on p. 39-40 in They Say, I Say and use at least one of them in your paragraph.

In your second paragraph, describe one SUPPORTING ARGUMENT, EXAMPLE, ELABORATION or COMPARISON from the article and explain how it relates to the main argument. Look at the transitions from p. 109-110 in They Say, I Say and use at least one of them in your paragraph.

Don't include your own view here; do your best to understand hers, whether you agree or not.


If you still need to do your response to Johnson and Stevens, you can do so on the blog, by hand, or type it to turn in. You will still receive feedback and credit. I am best able to help you the more of your writing I see. See the post below for directions on that assignment.

Reading and Writing for Monday, September 30th

For Tuesday, October 1st, look at two articles from They Say, I Say from our reader's choice poll: "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," by Steven Johnson (p. 277-294), and "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box," by Dana Stevens (p. 295-298). Use the book if at all possible, but you if you need to you can find links to Johnson's article  here  and Stevens' article here.

In a post, write a paragraph that describes Johnson's main argument and at least one piece of evidence he uses to support it. In another paragraph, describe Stevens' response to Johnson. What does she disagree with and why? Look at chapter two of They Say, I Say for some guidelines on summary.

In this post focus on these two authors and their ideas. In class, will bring in our opinions and examples as well.

Terms for "blue collar brilliance" by Mike Rose and "Extra Lives: why videogames matter" by Tom Bissell

In “Blue-Collar Brilliance” by Mike Rose, I have selected two terms which are Affirmation and Diverse. Affirmation means the action or process of affirming something or being affirmed which is state as a fact; assert strongly and publicly. Affirmation means to me that when a person is proving him/her argument with strong facts in public (meaning everyone). For example, John F. Kennedy argues that the Americans should fund for nuclear fallout shelter program to increase. He prove his statement by facts like it’s better for everyone to be prepared in case a bomb drops in New York City which cause mass of distortion and kill everyone in sight which he shared this strong information to everyone. Another term is Diverse. Diverse means showing a great deal of variety or very different. Diverse means to me  a good deal of being different in many ways like jobs, home, schools, and the person self of being good or bad. For example, James Feldman has a job in technician which he has a good deal of getting paid more than his old job like in Toys ‘R’s selling Barbies all day with low paid. In “Extra Lives: Why Videogames Matter” by Tom Bissell, I also selected two more terms which are Mired and Aggravated. Mired means cause to become stuck in mud. Mired means to me when some person is having a bad day and not really in a good mood. For example, today went terrible because it started to rain and my books got ruined when while Ronald McDonald stood there and started to stare at me, which is creepy. Another term is aggravated which means (of an offense) made more serious by attendant circumstances (such as frame of mind). Aggravated means to me when someone is getting angry or frustrated by something uncomfortable from a person. For example, I’m so annoyed that my sister keeps bothering me and won't leave me alone. This is frustrating when younger siblings bothered old siblings because they are in boredom of watch “Dario the explorer” 

            Is Watching TV Make Us Smarter?

 In the article “Watching TV Makes Us Smarter” the writer Steven Johnson’s argues that watching TV in a way can develop our brains and improve our thinking skills. Johnson’s supported his main point by claiming that some dramas such as, 24 episodes, involves a lot of thinking to understand what is happening. He states that people need to pay attention, to make inferences and to keep a track of the shifting social relationships in order to make sense of any complex TV drama such as, 24 episodes. In other words, he wanted to say that watching TV puts our brains in charge and  make us think hard about what we are watching to connect the events and get the show’s point. Moreover, the author indicated that watching TV shows or playing video games can benefit different generations of people. For example, he mentioned that a parent and his kids can learn different technological skills or terms by watching a particular show or playing a specific video game.

         

Dana Stevens in “Thinking out Of the Idiot Box” is taking the opposite side of what Johnson’s think. She believes that watching TV cannot people smarter. She claims that people choose what they watch based on advertisement not on what is more suitable and beneficial for them. She thinks that this kind of shows just block people brains and make them dis-sociable and inactive in the community around them. It also make them addictive to watch more and more without thinking what is good for them. 

By Nour.

You're 16, you're beautiful and you're a voter by Anya Kamenetz

In the essay "you're 16, you're beautiful and you're a voter the author Anya Kamenetz believes that if people regard teenagers as adults they will be more responsible. She suggests that the government should reduce the voting age to 16 years old. She claims that if 16 years-old are old enough to do other things like drive, work, go to school then they are old enough to vote. In addition the author argues that 16 year-old who want to vote they should first pass a simple civics course. Furthermore she emphasizes that voting is a privilege and responsibility besides a right.

Anya Kamenetz explains that in reality 16 years-old can have their credit card, as well as have experienced drinking. They are already considered as adults in some cases, so why not have the chance to vote. The author also supports her main idea by stating that if they are old enough to have a learners permit they should have the right to vote.

Reading and Writing for Monday September 30th

Watching TV Makes You Smarter by Steven Johnson

   Watching TV makes you smarter its Steven Johnson's passage title and also his main argument. By watching television we are developing our brains. The author is supporting his argument specifically on page 279 in the very first sentence where he is referring to the hit drama 24, he is stating that anybody who is watching 24 must pay attention, make inferences and track shifting social relationships in order to understand 24. Moreover he claims that you have to put your mind to work, you have to think very carefully and you have to connect the events in order to comprehend the hit drama. In addition on page 294 the author mentions that by watching TV not only kids get the change to learn but also grown ups. They can decipher all the new technological terms and meanings and both kids with parents can have fun by playing a game on Television or by watching a movie.

Thinking Outside the Idiot Box by Dana Stevens

   Dana Stevens is totally disagreeing with Johnson's main idea that TV makes us smarter. We can understand hers denying by the very first sentence "Does watching TV make you smarter ?" "Duh, I dunno".
Stevens on page 298 is supporting that a lot of people are choosing what they like to watch based on what is popular and based on all the advertisements. Also she challenges everyone to just turn off the television for one week and she is saying ironically that no one will get any dumber if we spend our time by doing something more creative. Furthermore she believes that a kid who is new to this world spends his free time by reading a book or by playing with his friend, he might not even want to watch television after all.

   

Blue-Collar Brilliance

    In the passage, "Blue-Collar Brilliance," which written by Mike Rose, he believes that if people work without plan everyday, then it will affect people's work in future. Also, when people depreciated the knowledge that they have to learn, they limited themselves in education and opportunities to be successful. Therefore, people can't follow up the cultural divides because they are not smart and push themselves to learn the knowledge everyday.

     According to the example of the passage, people have to learn the experiences and knowledge while they are working. For example, Mike Rose's mother, who work as a waitress in a coffee shops, is a smart woman. Waitress is one of difficult jobs because she has to remember the orders belong to which customer. Also, she has to know the system of store because she has to answer any kinds of question from customers. On the other hand, she has to run to carry plates and cups with her body. Most important, she learned the culture of people, and she knows how deal with different kinds of customer; she organized what to do in order. 

      I agree with the author's statement that if people didn't work smart, they would be unsuccessful. I work as a cashier in a Chinese restaurant, it's also one of difficult jobs to do. For example, I have to talk to 2 phone at the work, and I have to organize the order at the same times. Most important, I have to remember price of each order; I have to remember what people like and dislike in the order. Also, I have to know how to talk to people who is crazy. It's like a big system that contain many staff, and I have to organize it in order.

teens rights

In “You’re 16, You’re Beautiful and You’re a Voter” by Anya Kamenetz, she suggests of young teen age people who are the age of 16 should have the right to vote like everyone else, are likely voting for president, mayor or someone else. She continue elaborate that the age of 16 who are working should get a credit card to show how responsible they truly are which means as adults. She argues that young people are eligible to work, drink, and to get married like getting a first time job working in McDonalds; taking people’s order in a young age shows potential in their life work as a teenager. She highly believes that people of the age of 16 are able to get their driving license which shows that they can prove they are highly responsible as adult to vote as their rights.

She clearly point out some facts that people in their teens are getting their permit test to be able eligible to get very own driver license like showing a high rate of level responsibly of taking a New York state exams in each school grade that is given to them. She also include that people in age of 16 should take the civics test which is similar to a citizenship test should able to pass the exam and able to vote. But teens should be advice about drinking alcohol tests for drinking.

You are 16, you’re are beautiful and you are a voter:

In the article “you are 16, you’re are beautiful and you are a voter” the writer “Kamenetz” is trying to state that the government should lower the voting age to 16 years. She argues that young people who smoke, drink, and can get a credit card, should be given the chance to vote.  She believes that giving this right to young people will make them think more serious. She also thinks that this in a way will improve the sense of responsibility inside them toward their future’s decisions.  

 The author used some points to support her idea about lowering the voting age to sixteen. For example, she mentioned that young people especially the ones who work have the right to get credit cards. She also indicated that teenagers can get their driving permit at the age of sixteen as well. Another point the author went through was teenagers who want to vote should pass a civics course in order to get a permit to vote. In other words, she is trying to say that teenagers and young people who can do and get the things that I mentioned earlier, should get the chance to give their views and to participate in elections. 

By Nour Rizk.

You're 16, You're Beautiful and You're a Voter

     In the passage which written by Anya Kamenetz, as saying that teenagers could be voter as 16 years old. she believes that teenagers can rise up fast if parents treat them as adult. In addition, government should lower the laws for voting age to 16. Also, the legal age should not be fixed, it should be flexible for teenagers by practicing and educational.

    teenagers can rise up fast if parents treat them as adult. There is a example to support the author's idea, Voting is one of the way to test teenagers because they have to take the exams to get the qualify to vote, and teenagers can learn the responsibility to vote by taking the exam. Since they are taking the exams, they learn from the exam at the same time. Also, it improves teenagers brain function because they have to struggle with the questions. However,teenagers have to think in deeply and work they brain truly. This is example to show that if parents allow their kids to practice things which are adults did, teenagers will become a adults fast, and they will get knowledge more than other teenagers.

Watching TV Make You Smart or Not?

      According to the article which is written by Steven Johnson, watching TV can make people smart in different way. The violent television dramas and juvenile sitcoms are the example of experience for people because people have the ideas to deal with the situation as the TV in their life. Also, people will be attention, patience, retention in their life by watching TV because they have to figure out what will happen after a action of the TV shows. these are the point that Johnson figures out, he believe that people can learn whatever they want in TV, and watching the events happen around the world if people sit in front of TV.

        In "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box," written by Dana Stevens. She believe that watching TV can't make you smart. For example, she points out the 24, which prevents people thinking too much, and it's not really connected to people's life. Also, people forget what they have to do while sitting in front of TV, and becoming isolation(stop communicate with social). Most important, watching TV is kind of poison for people to be addictive that people want to watch more and more.

         I agree with Johnson's point that people can learn many things from TV, and the things happened around the world because we can watch the news on TV, but I also agree with Steven because many children addict to watch TV and they forget to do things they need.

Steven Johnson VS Dana Stevens

        Watching TV Makes you smarter by Steven Johnson tells about how TV is good for you and helps you understand the world around. People are getting smart by watching TV's shows drama like "The Sopranos", "24", and many more. He describes that watching TV shows can bring knowledge in different genres in drama, action, romantic, horror, social life, sci-fi, mystery, supernatural, and a lot more. His argument is that TV brings good understanding the sequences and relation that has brought in our societal. "The intelligence arrives fully formed in the words and actions of the characters on-screen." This states that each character bring intelligence about the world and use action to entertain the audience to understand societal and get the viewers to learn the information that is given to them. Johnson describes TV is good for you and can help learn about the topic your research on history or something else that the teacher has given the assignment which you have to work.

            Thinking outside the Idiot Box (Does watching TV Make You Smarter? Duh….I dunno) by Dana Stevens tells how TV does make you smarter but plan dumb by watching TV everyday which does not give people intelligence but instead make people stupid by watching and not forcing on the real world. Her argument is that TV is virus; that cause people to watch more TV and not realizing it that is bad for them. “Watching TV teaches you to watch more TV” this statement shows that watching TV does not give you knowledge but gives you the craving to watch more TV while it detects your memories of education and your plans of what were you suppose to do in this hour like hanging with friends at the bar or telling your wife the great new that you have been promoted in your job. Stevens describes Johnson’s article how he mistaking the meaning of intelligence and given the people the wrong idea of watching TV makes you smart which Johnson quoted “You no more challenge your mind by watching these intelligent shows than you challenge your body watching Monday Night Football…..The intellectual work is happening on-screen, not off” TV does not make people smarter by watching TV every day, it only gives children the wrong idea of learning education on TV and not about to learn it in school from real experiences in the child life of learning. TV only give answer and not able to find the answers by hand or study it for memory.   

            I agree with Johnson’s statement “is the kind of thinking you have to do to make sense of a cultural experience” and Steven ‘statement “a truth already grasped by the makers of children’s programming like Teletubbies, which is essentially a tutorial instructing toddlers in the basic of vegging out” They prove good points that TV has good connections to our world but not so good on given Children’s education by watching TV all day. Yes, it can be useful and learn more about the socially that we live in but can damage the human brain and can make people blind by watching too much TV.   

They Say I Say Table of Contents

For Thursday, look at the table of contents to They Say I Say. If you haven't been able to buy the book yet, you can find the table of contents at this link. 

Based on our free writing, pick a section that relates to your interests and then pick two articles from that section you might like to read. You can browse or start reading but you can also just go by the titles.

If none of the sections relate to your interests, write a question that describes some of what you want to learn about. Try to make it a question that can't be answered by a simple google search. We'll try to find articles to relate to these questions.

In the comments, give the section and article titles and a sentence or two about why you picked them, or write the question we will look for articles to answer.

Assignment for Tuesday, September 24th

Read "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell (handout). No written assignment, but circle parts that strike you for whatever reason and any that confuse you, and be ready to discuss it in class.

If you haven't already, be sure to post your summary of the Coney Island description. Also cast your vote for the essay(s) that are of interest you from They Say in the post below.

Assignment for Tuesday, September 17th

Finish reading the Coney Island chapter of Colson Whitehead's "The Colossus of New York"
As you read, circle any unfamiliar vocabulary. Then look it up at least two of these terms in a paper dictionary or online, and/or figure out its meaning from the context.

In a short blogpost, identify two of the vocabulary words you looked up. Give the page number they came from, the definition, and what you think the sentence now means.

Then write a paragraph that summarizes this chapter. How would you describe Whitehead's view of Coney Island and what he wants us to understand about this place?

If you have trouble posting you can leave your post as a comment or print it out to turn in. By next week we'll make sure everyone is able to post on the course blog.

MAJDALIN=NOUR

i would like to vote for number 16.IS FAST FOOD THE NEW TOBACCO? and for number 4."YES / NO / OKAY, BUT": Three Ways to Respond as well. 

Hi professor just to remind you (MAJDALIN) Is Nour!!!

The author started by describing Coney Island as a place that people go to in order to escape from the extremely hot city and to spend a good time as well. Then he described the beach, how people act on it, and how easily people can lose their things in the sand. After that he explored the negative sides about Coney Island which were how dirty the beach was with the cigarettes butts, wood drifts, seaweed bums and other metal things everywhere in the sand; Moreover, the poor equipment in the rides was another negative side about it. He also imaged the happiness of the kids who were enjoying playing and drawing different shapes with the sand. At the end he described the island as a dead place in the winter because it’s like an off season for this island when no one goes there.

Coney Island

In the chapter, Coney Island by Colson Whitehead, there were two words that I did not know the meaning of. These words are "rickety" and "sinew". "Rickety", which is found in page 95, means weak; shacky. Knowing the definition of "Rickety", the  sentence "Seems so rickety" means that the structure of the roller coaster Cyclone is weak. "Sinew", which is also found in page 95, means strenght. The sentence, "This ride is them throwing punches and you ride on their arms, dip and rise and coast and roll on shiftting muscle and sinew", to me, means that the author is describing a fight in which included a strong punch.

           In this chapter the author describes the setting of Coney Island in his point of view. For example, he tells the reader about the well known roller coaster named Cyclone, kids constructing "cities" made of sand, the behaviour of the people that are in the location and comparing the difference between Coney Island in the winter and summer. Colson Whitehead gives the reader an image that Coney Island is an unenjoyable and unpleasurable place. He states that sand will get in your food and the temperatuer in the area is high. I believe the author is only describing Coney Island in a negative manner and not focusing in the positive things that Coney Island has to offer.

Coney Island homework

  

The two vocabularies are corrosive and rickety which I'm defining on page 95.The definition on corrosive which is: tending to cause corrosion which in other words in destroyed and damaged like in metal, stone and materials which slowly cause by aid rain and chemical exposure. The sentence in context that has this meaning; "withstand the corrosive agents in fear sweat." this sentence mean that the amusement isn't safe which brings a great amount of fear on the person point of view. The amusement was abandoned with rusting paint almost to believe is haunted. The second word is rickety which mean structure or piece of equipment that is poorly made and it’s likely to collapse. The sentence in context that states its meaning; "Seems so rickety." this sentence mean to me that place seems to be broken down and all the missing parts with damaged looking rides or something in the text that I have read. I truly believe that whitehead is showing the reader how to understand that Coney Island is a place for fun without being affected by the rusting molded rides and other parts as rusting metal bars from the rides. People came to learn the history and have a great time while they explored the place. He also give the reader the description of the place by weather, the decreased of poorly equipment in the rides. But give a good plot about Coney Island of how people enjoyed and have a good time.  

The People Speak: Additions to Syllabus/Votes

Based on our discussion on Tuesday, please note the following additions to our class policy:

- The professor will provide weekly feedback to each student about his or her writing, as long as he/she completes the writing we're doing and comes to class to get the feedback. This may be in the form of comments on our course blog or written comments on work you hand in.

- Students will choose some of our course readings and writing topics. Starting week two, we'll brainstorm ideas and arrange to do this, so bring your ideas.

- Both the professor and student will make every effort to be in class on time; both will be flexible in the case of an emergency or unforeseen obstacles.

- The professor and the students will treat one another with respect in class and in all other communications. We will make an effort to listen to each other in class. We may strongly disagree about ideas, but we will be respectful in the ways we discuss them and avoid personal attacks. We will also be respectful of student/faculty difference, whether based on gender, race, nationality, sexual orientation, or disability, in line with LaGuardia's policies on harassment and non-discrimination. When we critique pieces of writing, we will do so in the spirit of helping each other become stronger writers rather than tearing each other down.

- If either a student or the professor feels the other has broken these agreements (or others from the original syllabus), he or she will take the initiative to speak to the other person one on one, and try to resolve the problem. If a student feels another student has done so, they can speak to that student individually or ask the professor for guidance.


- We will be considerate in how we use our cell phones in class. We'll make sure they are on mute or vibrate and don't interfere with what we're doing and our ability to listen to each other. We may use them to answer questions that come up in class. (You'll still want to excuse yourself if you have to talk on the phone, of course.)



- Students will decide the degree to which they feel comfortable speaking out loud in class. The professor won't call on someone unless they volunteer. We will help those who don't speak as much feel like a part of the group by working in small groups and responding to each other's work in writing or communicating outside of the class and one-on-one. When considering the students' grade, the professor will look at the completion of written assignments both in and outside of class, group work, absences, and lateness, but not how often the student speaks in class. Regardless of how often a student speaks, he/she will make an effort to be alert and attentive and will not sleep in class.