Click here for your Russia partner quiz.
Also, make sure you watch this video if you haven't already seen it.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Russia Practice Quiz
Click here for your Russia partner quiz.
Also, make sure you watch this video if you haven't already seen it.
Monday, December 5, 2011
AP Politics Final
Mexico: Country Case Study
AP Comparative Government and Politics
Fall 2011 Final Exam
Your group will create a presentation of 20 minutes (no longer) that teaches the class about one aspect of Mexico’s government and politics. Your presentation may consist of PowerPoint, video, lecture, interactive simulation, music, performance, or any other media you clear with Ms. Fugit.
1. Sovereignty, Authority, and Power (Alex, Felix, Rut, Alejandro)
a. What is the source of the government’s legitimacy?
b. What is the degree of the government’s legitimacy? (STUPID G) Elaborate at length.
c. What is the role of the government in the state’s economy?
d. Describe the state’s political culture.
e. Define camarillas and explain how their role continues to change in Mexico.
2. Political Institutions (Eddie, Marysol, Harold, Bianca)
a. Describe the structure and workings of the branches of government: executive, legislative, and judiciary.
b. Describe the ways the branches of government interact. How are the branches separated or fused?
c. Identify whether the state uses a parliamentary or a presidential system.
d. Describe the state’s electoral process and its process for recruiting political elites.
e. Describe the country’s party system and describe the prominent political parties.
f. Describe the state’s bureaucracy and its positive and negative effects.
3. Citizens, Society, and the State (Jhossept, Will, Stephanie, Gao)
a. Describe significant cleavages present in the state. Identify the type of cleavage, its roots, and its effects on citizens. Describe any formal policy created to assist the citizens affected by the cleavage.
b. Describe the role of civil society in the state: To what degree can citizens protest, strike, and express dissent? How free are the press and the media?
c. Identify and describe contemporary social movements. They could be environmental, antiglobalization, civil rights related, or otherwise.
4. Political and Economic Change (Christina, Jared, Julio, Kelly)
a. Describe Mexico’s political shifts throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. Describe revolutions, coups, or other important events.
b. Describe how standards of living, income gaps, educational opportunities, and access to social services have changed over the past 100 years.
c. Describe corruption in the state and identify the sources of this corruption. Explain how corruption affects the legitimacy of the state and the standard of living of the citizens.
d. Describe how NAFTA has affected the state.
5. Public Policy (Lorenzo, Mande, Gina)
a. Explain how domestic policy is written in the state.
b. Explain how increased economic privatization has affected domestic policy in the state.
c. Describe significant interest groups and their influence.
d. Describe significant policy changes regarding civil rights, labor, or the environment.
AP Comparative Government and Politics
Fall 2011 Final Exam
Your group will create a presentation of 20 minutes (no longer) that teaches the class about one aspect of Mexico’s government and politics. Your presentation may consist of PowerPoint, video, lecture, interactive simulation, music, performance, or any other media you clear with Ms. Fugit.
1. Sovereignty, Authority, and Power (Alex, Felix, Rut, Alejandro)
a. What is the source of the government’s legitimacy?
b. What is the degree of the government’s legitimacy? (STUPID G) Elaborate at length.
c. What is the role of the government in the state’s economy?
d. Describe the state’s political culture.
e. Define camarillas and explain how their role continues to change in Mexico.
2. Political Institutions (Eddie, Marysol, Harold, Bianca)
a. Describe the structure and workings of the branches of government: executive, legislative, and judiciary.
b. Describe the ways the branches of government interact. How are the branches separated or fused?
c. Identify whether the state uses a parliamentary or a presidential system.
d. Describe the state’s electoral process and its process for recruiting political elites.
e. Describe the country’s party system and describe the prominent political parties.
f. Describe the state’s bureaucracy and its positive and negative effects.
3. Citizens, Society, and the State (Jhossept, Will, Stephanie, Gao)
a. Describe significant cleavages present in the state. Identify the type of cleavage, its roots, and its effects on citizens. Describe any formal policy created to assist the citizens affected by the cleavage.
b. Describe the role of civil society in the state: To what degree can citizens protest, strike, and express dissent? How free are the press and the media?
c. Identify and describe contemporary social movements. They could be environmental, antiglobalization, civil rights related, or otherwise.
4. Political and Economic Change (Christina, Jared, Julio, Kelly)
a. Describe Mexico’s political shifts throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. Describe revolutions, coups, or other important events.
b. Describe how standards of living, income gaps, educational opportunities, and access to social services have changed over the past 100 years.
c. Describe corruption in the state and identify the sources of this corruption. Explain how corruption affects the legitimacy of the state and the standard of living of the citizens.
d. Describe how NAFTA has affected the state.
5. Public Policy (Lorenzo, Mande, Gina)
a. Explain how domestic policy is written in the state.
b. Explain how increased economic privatization has affected domestic policy in the state.
c. Describe significant interest groups and their influence.
d. Describe significant policy changes regarding civil rights, labor, or the environment.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
To further study the relationship between GDP and indicators of development, use cia.gov to compare our six countries: Russia, China, United Kingdom, Iran, Mexico, and Nigeria.
Go to the site where you can create your own graph here. Open each CIA Factbook in a different tab.
Choose to create an XY graph. Make a bubble graph. Create a graph with the per capita GDP represented in the X axis and any other significant statistic represented in the Y axis. Examples of significant statistics could be birth rate, death rate, or literacy rate, but there are many others.
In "size," enter the country's population. In "Line Width," choose "No line." Email me your graph, then respond to these questions in a blog comment:
1. Is there a positive or negative correlation between per capita income and your other significant statistic?
2. Is country population relevant or important in this graph? If so, how?
3. Think about your answer to question one. What conclusions can you draw about this?
4. According to this graph, which of our countries is the most developed? Explain.
5. According to this graph, which of our countries is least developed? Explain.
6. Do you think your graph is a fair and reasonable assessment of levels of development? Explain.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Friday, May 20, 2011
Water Scarcity Products: Period 4
Post a summary of your group's water scarcity solution. Be as detailed as possible, and include information about potential challenges and how you will solve them. Make sure the names of all group members are in the post.
You must also respond to two other groups' solutions with critique. Write their group members' names at the top, write your critique or challenge you foresee, and write your names at the bottom.
You must also respond to two other groups' solutions with critique. Write their group members' names at the top, write your critique or challenge you foresee, and write your names at the bottom.
Friday, May 6, 2011
New York Times Editorial on Torture
All Model UN 1 students who were part of our debate on torture should read this New York Times editorial.
The Torture Apologists
The killing of Osama bin Laden provoked a host of reactions from Americans: celebration, triumph, relief, closure and renewed grief. One reaction, however, was both cynical and disturbing: crowing by the apologists and practitioners of torture that Bin Laden’s death vindicated their immoral and illegal behavior after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Jose Rodriguez Jr. was the leader of counterterrorism for the C.I.A. from 2002-2005 when Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other Al Qaeda leaders were captured. He told Time magazine that the recent events show that President Obama should not have banned so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. (Mr. Rodriguez, you may remember, ordered the destruction of interrogation videos.)
John Yoo, the former Bush Justice Department lawyer who twisted the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions into an unrecognizable mess to excuse torture, wrote in The Wall Street Journal that the killing of Bin Laden proved that waterboarding and other abuses were proper. Donald Rumsfeld, the former defense secretary, said at first that no coerced evidence played a role in tracking down Bin Laden, but by Tuesday he was reciting the talking points about the virtues of prisoner abuse.
There is no final answer to whether any of the prisoners tortured in President George W. Bush’s illegal camps gave up information that eventually proved useful in finding Bin Laden. A detailed account in The Times on Wednesday by Scott Shane and Charlie Savage concluded that torture “played a small role at most” in the years and years of painstaking intelligence and detective work that led a Navy Seals team to Bin Laden’s hideout in Pakistan.
That squares with the frequent testimony over the past decade from many other interrogators and officials. They have said repeatedly, and said again this week, that the best information came from prisoners who were not tortured. The Times article said Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times, fed false information to his captors during torture.
Even if it were true that some tidbit was blurted out by a prisoner while being tormented by C.I.A. interrogators, that does not remotely justify Mr. Bush’s decision to violate the law and any acceptable moral standard.
This was not the “ticking time bomb” scenario that Bush-era officials often invoked to rationalize abusive interrogations. If, as Representative Peter King, the Long Island Republican, said, information from abused prisoners “directly led” to the redoubt, why didn’t the Bush administration follow that trail years ago?
There are many arguments against torture. It is immoral and illegal and counterproductive. The Bush administration’s abuses — and ends justify the means arguments — did huge damage to this country’s standing and gave its enemies succor and comfort. If that isn’t enough, there is also the pragmatic argument that most experienced interrogators think that the same information, or better, can be obtained through legal and humane means.
The Torture Apologists
The killing of Osama bin Laden provoked a host of reactions from Americans: celebration, triumph, relief, closure and renewed grief. One reaction, however, was both cynical and disturbing: crowing by the apologists and practitioners of torture that Bin Laden’s death vindicated their immoral and illegal behavior after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Jose Rodriguez Jr. was the leader of counterterrorism for the C.I.A. from 2002-2005 when Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other Al Qaeda leaders were captured. He told Time magazine that the recent events show that President Obama should not have banned so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. (Mr. Rodriguez, you may remember, ordered the destruction of interrogation videos.)
John Yoo, the former Bush Justice Department lawyer who twisted the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions into an unrecognizable mess to excuse torture, wrote in The Wall Street Journal that the killing of Bin Laden proved that waterboarding and other abuses were proper. Donald Rumsfeld, the former defense secretary, said at first that no coerced evidence played a role in tracking down Bin Laden, but by Tuesday he was reciting the talking points about the virtues of prisoner abuse.
There is no final answer to whether any of the prisoners tortured in President George W. Bush’s illegal camps gave up information that eventually proved useful in finding Bin Laden. A detailed account in The Times on Wednesday by Scott Shane and Charlie Savage concluded that torture “played a small role at most” in the years and years of painstaking intelligence and detective work that led a Navy Seals team to Bin Laden’s hideout in Pakistan.
That squares with the frequent testimony over the past decade from many other interrogators and officials. They have said repeatedly, and said again this week, that the best information came from prisoners who were not tortured. The Times article said Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times, fed false information to his captors during torture.
Even if it were true that some tidbit was blurted out by a prisoner while being tormented by C.I.A. interrogators, that does not remotely justify Mr. Bush’s decision to violate the law and any acceptable moral standard.
This was not the “ticking time bomb” scenario that Bush-era officials often invoked to rationalize abusive interrogations. If, as Representative Peter King, the Long Island Republican, said, information from abused prisoners “directly led” to the redoubt, why didn’t the Bush administration follow that trail years ago?
There are many arguments against torture. It is immoral and illegal and counterproductive. The Bush administration’s abuses — and ends justify the means arguments — did huge damage to this country’s standing and gave its enemies succor and comfort. If that isn’t enough, there is also the pragmatic argument that most experienced interrogators think that the same information, or better, can be obtained through legal and humane means.
MUN 4: Final Exam Reflection
Read the Asia Society Graduate Portfolio System rubrics for English Language Arts and Social Studies. In regard to your work in Model UN over the past 3-4 years, highlight where you would rate yourself for each criterion. Your ratings can be based on work in class, at simulations, mentoring younger MUN students, or any other contributions you have made to the Model UN program at IHSS.
After rating yourself on those two rubrics, you will choose an overall rating for yourself: Emerging, Developing, Proficient, or Advanced. You will argue your rating in a two page essay, using specific examples to prove your rating. To refresh your memory, some of your projects this year were:
-Haiti emergency relief simulation
-Nuclear energy simulation
-North Korea/South Korea conflict resolution (semester 1 final)
-MUNSA
-Global Classrooms
-HAMUN
-Terrorist vs. Freedom Fighter tribunal
-Terry Jones Mock Trial
-Teacher Assistant for an MUN class (if applicable)
-THE BLOG!!!!!
Those are just a few examples, and you can also use examples from previous years of Model UN.
In your concluding paragraph, use the language from the Global Leadership Performance Outcomes to summarize how Model UN has helped you develop into an informed global leader.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)