HASTY GENERALIZATION: because there is no real evidence I have stated that shows that the rate of movies with a relationship theme is actually growing. I would fix this by not actually stating this as a fact but explaining how a lot of movies do have a common theme of relationships.
“Hollywood seems to believe this, the amount of relationship movies out there today has been overwhelming and continues to grow and grow.”
HASTY GENERALIZATION: This is a conclusion I made based on the evidence, and how we react to being cheated on. It says that where cheating is not a big deal the sexuality of females isn’t always focused on completely. Therefor i concluded that the reason we are more upset due to cheating has to do with a focus in our culture on female sexuality. However, this is no where stated. I will fix this by not mentioning that our culture is necessarily focused on the sexuality of females.
“Also culture can affect how one reacts to the thought of a cheater in a relationship. The culture we live in is more focused on the female sexuality than most cultures are.”
I plan on dividing my poster into three panels one:the topic and the questions I’m asking, two: the “they say”, and three: what I think I will find. In the questions section I will state my question and the different aspects that go into the questions I’m talking about and the break down. In the “they say” I will use it as an opinion based section and show the stereotypes that are out there about my topic. In the third section I will show some of the charts I have already found and some of the evidence that either goes with or against the stereo-types.
After putting together my presentation it helped me to realize a more firm direction of where I was going with my research. It also helped me to decide on a more specific topic and made me realize that I had to do more research than I had done up until that point.
The questions after my presentation helped me get ideas as to where I’m going to be focusing my direction and a sense of what I really wanted to learn. It also gave me an idea about what other people wanted to learn about my topic which helped me to figure out what I wanted to find out too.
Overall doing this presentation gave me a firm direction as to where I was going with my research and made me realize I needed to narrow down my topic. This was due infact to the idea that I would only have 12pages to right about my topic and needed to have a set goal as to what I wanted to tell people and how I was going to accomplish this.
This is saying that you should use other answers and other ideas to support your thoughts and have reasoning behind them and not just pull them out of thin air. Just like you don’t say things without having things to support what you are saying. Also at this point in time most thoughts are not original many have thought the things we are thinking now before and that we would not be the first thinking it. Therefor no one really truly is an original thinker, originality occurs when you do not realize that someone else had thought of it before you.
It’s relavent to the research project because it lets us know that other people have thought of the same ideas before us and wanted to learn about it. So there will be previous sources of information on the topic. Also, that’s why our work is cited to show that someone supports our “origininal” idea.
The Enola gay exhibit shows information regarding the Japanese surrender and helps to depict more clearly what it helped with in WWII. The problem with this exhibit however is that it doesn’t necessarily convey the official story. A lot of what the exhibit is missing has to do with the affects of the bombing on the Japanese as opposed to just the American story. Although the bombs may have been helpful with the war it doesn’t show the negative affects it not only had on Japanese civilians but on the war veterans in America. This exhibit would have been better presented if it had showed both sides of the story as opposed to glorifying the Enola gay to be a wonderful success in the war. Although it helped us to not only secure victory but also end the war it still had its negative effects too. Museums should present both sides of the issue to us instead of being biased. Museums are supposed to help inform let and us form our own opinion as opposed to pushing theirs and certain believes on to the rest of us.
There has been much controversy over the years about if theres coke in coke a cola. Many believe that there is while the official story says there isn’t. However I have found they tend to leave out that there used to be coke in cola but trace amounts. This is not still true to the product we drink today but it was when it was originially manufactured. There were only trace amounts though just to get you to crave the product.
When browsing through the artifact titled scrapbook I noticed that it wasn’t exactly what one would expect when browsing through a scrap book. Most of the articles actually in the scrap book are news paper clippings announcing the death of Frederick Douglass as opposed to reflecting upon his life accomplishments. In fact almost everything in the scrapbook reflect information regarding his death in dozens of different newspapers, with the occasional photo of Douglass. The obituaries that are written next to his death announcement inform the reader about the family he had up to that point in time and the kind of life that he had lived. At the time of his death it is safe to say that he was a well respected man for there to be this much media over his passing. The obituaries also reference him with high regards, at the time of his passing he had accomplished a lot that many may never get to in their life time. It is safe to say that this was written in 1895, because this was the year he had passed away.
It tells us that Frederick Douglass had made a name for himself by the time that he had passed and was now known across the nation for his accomplishments in being an abolitionist. This artifact however does not inform us about what kind of news papers were announcing his death. There could be a difference in how people viewed his death based upon how biased the newspaper was especially in terms of race.