Updates...

I am still in the early stages of writing the contracts for my first independent component. Unfortunately I was unable to work on them over break because my mentor was not in California
I am having trouble with the introductorty  paragraph as well as the articles but I think once my mentor and I discuss the issues, it will be clear. thats all thats really been going on this past month

Blog 10: EQ

Content

1.  I reviewed the rule of three for writing an EQ.
       

Essential Question 
Once a topic is chosen, the student will develop a working essential question.  The purpose of the working essential question is to help the student build a strong foundation of research which will allow him or her to create an essential question that encourages depth and rigor in the chosen topic.  An essential question must:

• Provide a framework for studies (It calls for breadth and depth of research, Is not a yes/no question)
• Take a stance (It allows you to argue some point, Cannot be a recitation of facts or a list)
•  Format (It is specific, The wording makes sense)

2.  Review the following EQs and

• Tell us if each meets the rule of three.
• Tell why they do or don't.

 a.  What is the most important factor in healthy weight loss?
Yes it meets the rule of three because 

• Suggest research will be needed to decide what is the most important factor.

• It takes a stance of which factor is most important and why.
• Specifically aimed at healthy weight loss, and makes sense as it is written.

 b.  What is most important to securing a conviction in a criminal investigation?
It meets the requirements, however I feel the last part, "criminal investigation" is not specific enough.

•  Does provide framework for research in order to argue what is most important in securing the conviction
• Takes a stance on which factor is most important and why
• The "Criminal investigation" aspect of the EQ I feel needs to be a little more specific

 c.  What is most important in creating a hairstyle that best satisfies a customer?
No, this EQ does not meet the rule of three.

• This does not provide a framework for research, this can simply be answered by asking the customer
• I don't feel like it takes a stance on the issue, because no research can be conducted to argue for one hairstyle or another.
• Somewhat specific, but not enough for this EQ

 d.  How can an anesthesiologist best treat chronic pain?
Yes, this EQ satisfy the rule of three.

• Does call for a breath of research in order to answer the question, in terms of which treatment is best
• Does allow for an argument as to which method is best, this EQ takes the stance on what is the best way.
• I feel the "chronic pain" gave this EQ specificity, and the wording is clear,

3.  Based on your review of the rule of 3 and your experience with assessing four EQs, please write another draft EQ for your senior project.  The senior team will be meeting with students shortly for EQ revision and approval; you are expected to bring your research notebook to that meeting with your EQ draft written inside in pencil.

How can a lawyer best negotiate a transaction between two parties?

Blog 9: Lesson 1 Reflection

Content:

1. Positive Statement

I am proud of the fact that I was able to articulate some of the more complex ideas clearly in my presentation and do so slowly because I was afraid I would glaze over something without really explaining it and not make time.

2. Questions to Consider
       a.     What assessment would you give yourself on your Lesson 1 Presentation (self-assessment)?                                                                        
       AE       P          AP       CR       NC       

       b.     Explain why you deserve that grade using evidence from the Lesson 1 component contract.
In terms of professionalism, I don't feel like I lacked in any of the aspects of that category. Although I was a little sick, I managed to speak as loudly and as audible as possible which I think engaged the audience. I also made time which means I was able to condense my content successfully while still making it clear which was also part of the rubric. As for justification of foundation, the research and articles I cited as well as my mentorship reflect the content I presented so I don't feel I was lacking on that area.

3. What worked for you in your Lesson 1?
I definitely feel that the research (mostly my mentorship) I had for lesson one aided me in clearly explaining some concepts and examples as well as rehearsing and referencing my sources so I have a clear understanding for the content I explain.
4.  (What didn't work) If you had a time machine, what would you have done differently to improve your Lesson 1?
I feel like my introduction and hook activity could have been better. Initially I had trouble coming up with a hook activity or at least one that didn't seem too boring. If I could go back in time, I would have tried to come up with a more engaging and fun hook activity to make my audience more attentive to the rest of my presentation.